Actually, Martha, the absolute phrases are used more than one might imagine.
When I taught Strong's Crafting Cumulative Sentences in a comp class, I had
the students look at essays to find the patterns that we had been learning
and and we often found one absolute per paragraph in what some people call
creative essays--I remember that Annie Dillard was one of the authors--I
also hear them from weather men/people and once in a while on NPR.

Edith

> ----------
> From:         Martha Kolln[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Reply To:     Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> Sent:         Saturday, November 13, 1999 12:39 AM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: non-finite clause
>
> It's interesting, Bill, that you've never been called upon to teach your
> students about absolute phrases.  However, I can certainly believe that
> because, in my experience, absolutes are not common structures in
> expository writing.  Most of the examples are from fiction, especially
> from
> writers like Faulkner.  I suspect that if you were analyzing Faulkner's
> stylistic choices you might be so called upon.
>
> However, in this case we have a question from a teacher who apparently
> feels comfortable discussing nonfinite reduced clauses with her students.
> Those students are trying to figure out if this particular verb form is
> finite--and, if not, why not.  Isn't this the perfect opportunity for
> Janet
> to discuss absolute phrases--or, if she prefers, participial clauses
> functioning as sentence modifiers.  Or perhaps she can get to that
> particular kind of participial phrase by looking first at plain old
> participial phrases functioning within the sentence, rather than as
> modifiers--both active and passive.  In one case, the noun modified is the
> actor in relation to the participle, in the other, it is the object.
> Certainly, Johanna's test of tense is a good one too, a test that takes
> advantage of the students' innate language expertise.
>
> I really don't understand the reluctance of our profession to help our
> students learn labels for the grammatical structures we expect them to
> manipulate.  We are the only discipline that shies away from giving our
> students a language with which to discuss what they're working with.  We
> humans learn what the world is all about when we learn to label its parts.
>
>
> Martha
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >Well, yes, I do know a bit about absolutes and participles, though I've
> >never been called upon to teach about them. But I was trying to help
> Janet
> >skip all of the extra explanation and stay within her original approach.
> >
> >I must confess that I cannot imagine telling my students about a
> >"nonfinite, reduced passive clause," much less an "absolute phrase . . .
> a
> >noun followed by a participial phrase as a modifier."  Maybe I could if I
> >didn't have to cover phonemics and morphemics in the same course, but few
> >students can even pass a test on basic sentence structure. Most students
> >begin the course with zero knowledge of grammar.
> >
> >Bill
> >
> >>Golly, Bill, I thought my explanation was straightforward too, when I
> >>identified the structure as an absolute phrase--that is a noun followed
> by
> >>a participial phrase as a modifier.  When participles modify nouns,
> their
> >>relationship is a subject/predicate relationship--a  reduced clause,
> which
> >>you have illustrated.  When the participle is passive (fixed) the
> >>underlying clause is passive.
> >>
> >>I suspect you know enough grammar to respond to Martha's analysis!
> >>
> >>Martha
> >>
> >>>While I can't claim to know enough grammar to respond to Martha's
> analysis
> >>>of the construction in question, I confess I don't understand why the
> >>>"nonfinite, reduced passive clause" can't be explained in a
> straightforward
> >>>way:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>I stood still, and I fixed my whole attention upon the motion of her
> fingers.
> >>>
> >>>I stood still, and my whole attention was fixed (by me) upon the motion
> of
> >>>her fingers.
> >>>
> >>>(eliminate the "was" and the "and")
> >>>I stood still, my whole attention fixed upon the motion of her fingers.
> >>>
> >>>In other words, "attention" is the direct object.
> >>>
> >>>Bill
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Dear ATEG Listers:
> >>>>
> >>>>In the following sentence, "I stood still, my whole attention fixed
> upon the
> >>>>motion of her fingers, " (Helen Keller), I analyze 'my whole attention
> fixed
> >>>>upon the motion of her fingers' as a nonfinite, reduced passive
> clause.  I
> >>>>was trying to explain this to my class recently, and I found that
> though
> >>>>I am
> >>>>convinced that 'fixed' is nonfinite, none of my usual explanations
> worked.
> >>>>It simply refused to reveal itself neatly as nonfinite.
> >>>>
> >>>>When I am working with clauses having transitive verbs, I usually use
> >>>>passive
> >>>>transformations as a way of clarifying for myself the elements of that
> >>>>clause.  After my students had trouble seeing the clause as nonfinite,
> I
> >>>>spent a few minutes after class working it over.  I first tried to
> make it
> >>>>work as a simple transitive verb sentence with  'fixed' as a finite
> >>>>verb: 'my
> >>>>whole attention fixed upon the motion of her fingers.'  What I
> discovered is
> >>>>that although it is possible to write and say such a sentence, it
> doesn't
> >>>>behave like a transitive verb sentence, or like other clauses with
> 'fix' as
> >>>>their verb.
> >>>>
> >>>>For example
> >>>>'The man fixed the picture to the wall.'  This is easily made passive:
> >>>>'The picture was fixed to the wall by the man.'  However, in the case
> of 'my
> >>>>whole attention fixed upon the motion of her fingers,' I cannot make
> it
> >>>>passive because there is no direct object, yet 'fixed' seems to call
> for a
> >>>>direct object.
> >>>>
> >>>>If I change the sentence to 'my whole attention fixed itself upon the
> motion
> >>>>of her fingers,' the passive version is *Itself was fixed upon the
> motion of
> >>>>her fingers by my whole attention.  Well, that won't work.  The
> problem
> >>>>seems
> >>>>to be that 'my whole attention' as the subject can't actually perform
> the
> >>>>action of 'fixing'; 'my whole attention' is actually the thing that is
> being
> >>>>fixed and therefore is the object.
> >>>>
> >>>>I finally decided that this sentence's recalcitrance was itself
> evidence
> >>>>that
> >>>>'my whole attention fixed upon the motion of her fingers' is actually
> a
> >>>>reduced version of ''my whole attention was fixed upon the motion of
> her
> >>>>finge
> >>>>rs (by me),' the active version being 'I fixed my whole attention upon
> the
> >>>>motion of her fingers.'
> >>>>
> >>>>So I have two questions.
> >>>>
> >>>>1.  Do you agree that 'my whole attention fixed upon the motion of her
> >>>>fingers' is actually a nonfinite clause?  Might there be an acceptable
> >>>>finite
> >>>>reading of this?
> >>>>
> >>>>2.  How would you explain this to a group of students who are studying
> to be
> >>>>teachers and who are none too comfortable with the concepts finiteness
> and
> >>>>non-finiteness?  I've already rejected "Because I said so."
> >>>>
> >>>>I feel compelled to add that I believe that the ability to determine
> whether
> >>>>a verb is finite or not in a given clause is going to be useful to
> these
> >>>>students in their future roles as English and language arts teachers.
> I'm
> >>>>not just doing this to torture them --or myself.
> >>>>
> >>>>Janet Castilleja
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>William J. McCleary
> >>>3247 Bronson Hill Road
> >>>Livonia, NY 14487
> >>>716-346-6859
> >
> >
> >William J. McCleary
> >3247 Bronson Hill Road
> >Livonia, NY 14487
> >716-346-6859
>