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