Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Chinese
      • Home Country:
      • Hong Kong
      • Current Location:
      • Hong Kong

    • Join Date: Sep 2011
    • Posts: 78
    #1

    having + participle

    Dear Sir/ Madam

    "Traditionally, the event relied on Hakka residents' donations, but with many having moved from Tai Hang, organisers had to rely on funding from elsewhere."


    Could anyone tell me the grammatical role of the participle "having" in the clause, is it a participle adjective or an auxiliary verb? Can it be replaced by "have" ?



  1. Newbie
    Student or Learner
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Danish
      • Home Country:
      • Denmark
      • Current Location:
      • Greenland

    • Join Date: Oct 2011
    • Posts: 8
    #2

    Re: having + participle

    Quote Originally Posted by KSSEEJ View Post
    Dear Sir/ Madam

    "Traditionally, the event relied on Hakka residents' donations, but with many having moved from Tai Hang, organisers had to rely on funding from elsewhere."


    Could anyone tell me the grammatical role of the participle "having" in the clause, is it a participle adjective or an auxiliary verb? Can it be replaced by "have" ?


    many having moved from Tai Hang = gerund clause, prepositional object of "with"
    having = perfect aspect auxiliary
    Can it be replaced by "have"
    Negative.

  2. 5jj's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic

    • Join Date: Oct 2010
    • Posts: 28,134
    #3

    Re: having + participle

    I do't think we have a gerund here,

    'Many having moved' is a partciple clause (present perfect). 'With' here acts as a conjunction, in my opinion.

    'With many having moved' - 'Because/as/since many had to move'

  3. Newbie
    Student or Learner
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Danish
      • Home Country:
      • Denmark
      • Current Location:
      • Greenland

    • Join Date: Oct 2011
    • Posts: 8
    #4

    Re: having + participle

    Quote Originally Posted by fivejedjon View Post
    I do't think we have a gerund here,

    'Many having moved' is a partciple clause (present perfect). 'With' here acts as a conjunction, in my opinion.

    'With many having moved' - 'Because/as/since many had to move'
    "but is already a "conjunction". "with is a prep.

  4. Newbie
    Student or Learner
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Danish
      • Home Country:
      • Denmark
      • Current Location:
      • Greenland

    • Join Date: Oct 2011
    • Posts: 8
    #5

    Re: having + participle

    Quote Originally Posted by fivejedjon View Post
    'With many having moved' - 'Because/as/since many had to move'
    dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/with_6
    preposition
    With all the excitement and confusion, I forgot to say goodbye to her.

  5. 5jj's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic

    • Join Date: Oct 2010
    • Posts: 28,134
    #6

    Re: having + participle

    Quote Originally Posted by ambarde View Post
    "but" is already a "conjunction". "with" is a prep.
    You seem to suggest that it is not possible to have two conjunctions in succession. You can: I don't dislike him because he smokes, but because he smokes a smelly pipe.

    I agree that "with" almost always functions as a preposition. I am suggesting that it may be functioning as a conjunction in this example.
    Last edited by 5jj; 19-Nov-2011 at 20:26. Reason: typo

  6. Newbie
    Student or Learner
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Danish
      • Home Country:
      • Denmark
      • Current Location:
      • Greenland

    • Join Date: Oct 2011
    • Posts: 8
    #7

    Re: having + participle

    Quote Originally Posted by fivejedjon View Post
    You seem to suggest that it is not possible to have two conjunctions in succession. You can: I don't dislike him because he smokes, but because he smokes a smelly pipe.

    I agree that "with" almost always functions as a conjunction. I am suggesting that it may be functioning as a conjunction in this example.
    My message indeed suggests that, although what you say is not what I meant. Sorry. I should have been more pprecise and specific.
    Adverbials can be realized by different syntactical forms, eg., prepositional phrases, nonfinite clauses, etc. I think you already know that. "with" is clearly a preposition, and, given your status, I am stunned that you fail to realize that.

    I am suggesting that it may be functioning as a conjunction in this example.
    It may not!

  7. Newbie
    Student or Learner
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Danish
      • Home Country:
      • Denmark
      • Current Location:
      • Greenland

    • Join Date: Oct 2011
    • Posts: 8
    #8

    Re: having + participle

    When it comes to the nebulous class of adverbials, deductions made relying on meaning can play funny tricks on the unsuspecting victim.

  8. 5jj's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic

    • Join Date: Oct 2010
    • Posts: 28,134
    #9

    Re: having + participle

    Quote Originally Posted by ambarde View Post
    I think you already know that. "with" is clearly a preposition.
    I wrote in a previous post, "I agree that "with" almost always functions as a conjunction".

    In "Many havingmoved from Tai Hang, organisers had to rely on funding from elsewhere", most would consider the underlined words to be a participle phrase; it functions as an absolute clause.

    Putting 'with' in front of it complicates matters.

    The words can be taken as the equivalent of "With the departure of many from Tai Hang", or of "As/since/because many had moved from Tail Hang". I agree that we cannot rely on meaning when analysing the function of words, but I don't think we can rely on parts of speech found in dictionaries, either. I am not very happy with my suggestion that 'with' may be functioning as a conjunction. Equally, I am not happy with the 'preposition + gerund' reading. Let's see what others have to say.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Laos

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 57,910
    #10

    Re: having + participle

    Quote Originally Posted by ambarde View Post
    deductions made relying on meaning
    The primary purpose of language is to generate meaning, so meaning is not a second class citizen to grammar.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. perfect participle or simple participle?
    By keannu in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-Jan-2011, 03:31
  2. Present Participle vs Perfect participle
    By supsup in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-Dec-2010, 21:13
  3. past participle and present participle
    By Unregistered in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-Feb-2009, 20:01
  4. [Grammar] Compound Nouns, present participle, past participle, adjective.
    By Lthanh in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-Oct-2008, 16:03
  5. past participle or present participle
    By Unregistered in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 15-May-2008, 20:06

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •