Student or Learner
I know that a participial construction introduced by the participle “being” or “having been” may denote a cause for the state or action expressed in the main clause.
Being young and husky, I wanted a little time for myself.
Being tired I decided to turn in.
Being in a hurry I could not stop to talk to him.
Having been asked to go, I could not very well refuse.
Being a small boy he could not very well understand he meaning of it all.
Would you tell me why the participle “being” or “having been” is generally not used instead of an adverbial clause of time?
When I was in London, I had a chance to visit the Tate Gallery.
When he was a boy, he would spend all his days on the seashore.
Thanks for your efforts.
I’m not a teacher. I’m only a self-educated lover of English.
If you are confused of “would” in the last sentence from my post above, you may read the sentence in question in the following way:
When he was a boy, he used to spend all his days on the seashore.
Participle I Perfect Active and Passive denotes an action prior to the action expressed in the finite verb.
Being written in pencil the letter was difficult to make out.
Having written some letters he went to post them.
Mr. Bumble, having spread a handkerchief over his knees…began to eat and drink.
They were, indeed, old friends, having been at school together.
Having already been informed that he always slept with a light in the room, I placed one of the two lighted candles on a little table at the head of the bed.
Having been written long ago the manuscript was illegible.
A clause, not a participle, is generally used in English even when the Russian “active participle прошедшего времени” expresses an action simultaneous with that of the finite verb. (why???)
Bazarov lit his pipe and went up to the driver who was unharnessing the horses.
Базаров закурил трубку и подошел н ямщику, отпрягавшему лошадей.
My mother, who knew all his habits, used to thrust the obnoxious volume into some remote hiding-place.
Матушка, знавшая наизуст все его обичаи....всегда старалась засунуть несчастную книгу подальше.
I think it has something to do with the stative character of those verbs. "Being a boy, he liked fighting (He liked fighting because he was a boy, not when he was a boy)".
Thank you for your kindness.
I see what you mean.
When in London = When I was in London (not being..)
When a boy = When he was a boy… (not having been….)
That was beyond my comprehension why once we may use Participle I being and having been instead a cause for the state or action expressed in the main clause and another time you couldn’t use Participle I being and having been instead of an adverbial clause of time? Isn’t it a paradox?
Thank you again for your backing.
Bazarov lit his pipe and went up to the driver who was unharnessing the horses.Базаров закурил трубку и подошел к ямщику, отпрягавшему лошадей.I believe this is quite a different story. Here participle I is used as an attribute (not as an adverbial of reason like in your original question) and the only restriction is that it should be a simultaneous action for a participial phrase to be used. If it's a preceding action then a clause would be used. So the sentence could also be "Bazarov lit his pipe and went up to the driver unharnessing the horses". Unless there is a comma after driver, the doer of the action expressed by the participle is understood as 'the driver'.
Also: "Not knowing where to go, I turned back", "Feeling tired, I went to bed early". They are both adverbials of reason, and they are both statives. I don't think it's a coincidence.