possibly reaching historical records

[jutfrank]

You might want to ask this question in the 'Ask A Teacher' section, @Maybo. I presume you're not primarily concerned with or interested in academic disagreement over the proper definition of a clause.

 

[Maybo]

You might want to ask this question in the 'Ask A Teacher' section, @Maybo. I presume you're not primarily concerned with or interested in academic disagreement over the proper definition of a clause.

The thread was originally posted in 'Ask A Teacher' section but was moved here.

 

[jutfrank]

The thread was originally posted in 'Ask A Teacher' section but was moved here.

Oh, okay.

(I'd suggest to the moderators that questions from this user be kept in Ask A Teacher section, where she may receive a wider range of answers.)

 

[PaulMatthews]

Do #2 and #3 indicate different meanings?

Yes, just as your earlier examples 2. and 3. did, though the actual meanings may be ambiguous.

In 3. for example, the adjunct may be interpreted as having a temporal meaning: whilst kicking a stone, John fell into a pool.

Alternatively, and less likely, it may be intended to have a resultative interpretation: as a result of kicking a stone John fell into a pool.

Incidentally, you seem to be drifting off topic.

 

[Maybo]

Incidentally, you seem to be drifting off topic.

My topic has always been participle clause.

What does #2 indicate?

 

[PaulMatthews]

Your original question was answered a while ago. Yes, possibly reaching historical records is a participial clause; more specifically, it's a gerund-participial clause.

 

[Piscean]

t's a gerund-participial clause.

... to some writers.

 

[PaulMatthews]

... to some writers.

And that helps how?

 

[Piscean]

I was merely suggesting that the term gerund-participial clause was not the only term used by writers on the subject.