Student or Learner
David Cameron, UK prime minister, went to China leading a coalition government and a large delegation of British business figures, hoping to do business. He left realising that achieving big export deals with China is a slow and difficult process, even though he spoke softly on human rights and avoided gaffes.
Can 'realised' substitute for the part in red without changing its meanings?
Thanks a million!
The present participle used in this way normally has an active meaning, the past participle a passive meaning:
Sparta played Slavia yesterday, beating them six-nil. Sparta beat Slavia
The Slavia team slunk off the pitch, beaten and ashamed. The Slavia team were beaten and ashamed.
In your example, by the time Cameron left, he realised (active) that ...
Fivejedjon, thank you so much for your great help, but I have the LAST question.He left realising that achieving big export deals with China is a slow and difficult process, even though he spoke softly on human rights and avoided gaffes.
Can I think that the clause with the present participle functions as an adverbial modifier, which modifies 'left'?
I wish you wouldn't be afraid of my last question.
Have a nice day!
***** NOT A TEACHER / ONLY MY OPINION
While you and I are waiting for some teachers to give us the answer,
may I share what I was able to find.
(1) For easier analysis, I shall use this sentence:
The prime minister left China, realizing that securing trade deals is a most
(2) In my opinion only, I think that many high school teachers would
be delighted if their students could:
(a) identify the subject of the participle as "the prime minister."
(b) identify "the prime minister" as the noun that is being modified
by the participial phrase.
(3) I believe, however, that there are many teachers and books that
agree with YOU: sometimes the participial phrase modifies
not only the noun but also the verb.
(4) One teacher, with whom I communicated, gave me this quotation
from Modern English by Ms. Marcella Frank:
Some grammarians classify nonrestrictive participial phrases
as adverbials because of their ability to occupy the three
adverbial positions. ...[They can be] regarded as modifying
either the verb or more commonly the entire sentence.
(5) Finally, I received tremendous help from English Review Grammar
by Mr. Walter Kay Smart. (Because of copyright laws, I can mention
only a few things from his book.)
(a) Mr. Smart writes:
Some participial phrases have a peculiar dual function: the participle
which introduces the phrase is an adjective modifying the noun, but
the whole phrase is an adverb modifying a verb.
(b) Mr. Smart then gives this sentence:
They ran down the street, shouting and waving their hats.
(i) Mr. Smart gives that sentence as an example of "dual
function" and classifies it as indicating "accompanying
circumstances." That is (in his words):
Certain actions or circumstances that occur at the same time
as the action represented by the verb.
Maybe your sentence means something like:
The prime minister left China at the same time that [those five
words are called a conjunction by Professor George O. Curme]
he realized that securing trade deals is a most delicate process."
* Practice Exercises in Everyday English by Robert J. Dixson seems to
support my idea. He says, "Very often such participial constructions are
really substitutes for adverbial clauses." In other words, "realizing ...
delicate process" may be a substitute for the more formal
"at the same time that he realized that securing trade deals
is a most delicate process."
Thank you so much for asking that question. Participles always
confuse me. It is often hard to know what they modify. Doing
research for your question helped me to better understand my own
Last edited by TheParser; 21-Nov-2010 at 11:50.