having lived in Paris for years

[lagoo]

Hi,

Here are two sentences:
(1) The man, having lived in Paris for years, decided to return to London.
(2) The man having lived in Paris for years decided to return to London.

My English teacher said (1) is correct while (2) is wrong. But he didn't explain the reason, or he might not know either.
Whithout reason, just remembering the rules seems a bit silly way to learn English.

Could you help me clarify it?

 

[tedmc]

I think the second comma makes the difference.
The subordinate clause needs to be separated.

 

[TheParser]

Could you help me clarify it?

NOT A TEACHER

I think that if you say these sentences aloud, you will notice that you will naturally pause where I have written a comma:

1. The man, having lived In Paris for years, decided to return to London.
2. Having lived in Paris for years, the man decided to return to London.

As you can see, the words "having lived in Paris for years" is some extra information that has been "thrown" into the sentence.

I believe that such extra information is called "parenthetical" material, which is always set off by commas in writing and by pauses in speech.

In other words:

The man decided to return to London. (By the way, he had lived in Paris for years.)