Hi Laura,
All nouns can have participial phrases as modifiers. It's important
to notice too that there's a subject-verb relationship between the
noun and the participle. Those participles and participial phrases
that we identify as "dangling" result from a breakdown of that
relationship.
Standing on the curb, the bus almost hit me.
You can't move that participle to the end of the sentence, even
though it's the "me" who's doing the standing. Both opening and
closing participial phrases will always modify their own subject--and
that subject will be the subject of the sentence.
There's another aspect to participles as modifiers that's important.
As with clause modifiers, they will be either restrictive (defining)
or nonrestrictive (commenting). John Crow's example is clearly
nonrestrictive--or it wouldn't have commas. When the participle (or
any other modifier in the noun phrase) is there to identify--i.e.,
define--the noun, then we don't use commas; in such a case, the
participial phrase is not movable--i.e, it has to stick to the noun;
it can't open or close the sentence.
The little boy sitting on the curb could not hold back his tears.
In this case, the modifier is there to tell us which little boy we're
talking about. We can assume there are other little boys in the
picture; the "sitting" phrase identifies which one is crying. This
participial phrase is not movable.
I like to think of the post-noun position as the "home base" of the
participial phrase. (A single-word participle nearly always precedes
the noun, as adjectives do: "the sleeping baby" or "the crying boy.")
And every noun phrase in the sentence--subject, direct object, object
of the preposition, whatever!--can be modified by a restrictive
participle or participial phrase--those without commas.
But here's an interesting--and rather weird--restriction:
Nonrestrictive participial modifiers are restricted to the subject.
Here's an examples:
(a) Tom waved to the mailman standing on the porch. [The
mailman is on the porch.]
(b) Tom waved to the mailman, standing on the porch. [Tom is
on the porch.]
As with John's examples, we can rewrite (b) in two ways:
Tom, standing on the porch, waved to the mailman.
Standing on the porch, Tom waved to the mailman.
If you want a nonrestrictive modifier for the object--we'll have to
use something else--a clause perhaps. All the nouns in the sentence
can have clauses as modifiers, both restrictive and nonrestrictive:
Tom waved to the mailman, who was standing on
the porch.
A great many recent writing/grammar books for K-12 spend a lot of
time on the participial phrase because of the great versatility that
it gives writers. It's called a free modifier. But it's important to
remember, that it always applies to the sentence subject. And the
sentence subject is its subject.
I hope this helps.
Martha
>Hello--
>
>I am just a lowly 10th grade English teacher (an English MINOR at
>that), but I teach
>my students that the participial phrase modifies the element closest
>to it in the
>sentence. I would classify #2 as a misplaced modifier because it
>conveys the sense
>that the tears were trying to be brave. I would advise my students
>that #1 is the
>sentence most easily understood because the modifier does not
>interrupt the flow
>of the sentence. That's a pragmatic analysis from one who lives her
>life "in the
>trenches."
>
>I have never had the benefit of a linguistics or advanced grammar
>class, so some
>of your discussions strike me as akin to "how many angels can dance
>on the head
>of a pin." However, I am entertained, intrigued and at times edified by your
>obvious commitment to classifying and parsing the minutest components of our
>unwieldy, living language. Thank you!
>
>Laura Oliver
>Pleasantville High School
>
>
>---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
>From: John Crow <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Assembly for the Teaching of English
>Grammar<[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:25:53 -0400
>
>>The following sentence has the same participle phrase in three positions:
>>
>> 1. Trying to appear brave, the little boy fought back the tears.
>> 2. The little boy fought back the tears, trying to appear brave.
>> 3. The little boy, trying to appear brave, fought back the tears.
>>
>>"The little boy" is obviously given information; "tears" and "brave"
>>represent new information. I know that the decision about where to place
>>the participle phrase in a piece of writing would be made according to
>>context. However, some overarching principle should apply, it would seem.
>>So my question is this: does the placement of the participle phrase bring
>>either "tears" or "brave" into sharper focus?
>>
>>Here's my very confused take:
>>
>> - Fronting an element is supposed to emphasize that element, so #1
>> emphasizes "brave"?
>> - The final element in a sentence is emphasized, so in #2, "brave" is
>> prominent?
>> - Following this same logic, #1 emphasizes "tears" as well as "brave"?
>> If so, which one is more prominent?
>> - Putting the participle in the middle of the sentence de-emphasizes it,
>> so #3 clearly emphasizes "brave" and only "brave".
>>
>>Can anybody help me out of the explanatory morass? I would be most
>>appreciative!
>>John
>>
>>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>interface at:
>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________
>Sent via the WebMail system at pleasantville.k12.ia.us
>
>
>
>
>
>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>and select "Join or leave the list"
>
>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|
