.
Participles near the start of a sentence can be grammatically incorrect but this is avoidable in various ways
THE PROBLEM OF “DANGLING” PARTICIPLES
Participles are verbs with -ing or -ed (or the -ed equivalent on irregular verbs after HAVE, such as spoken and begun). Some participles combine with HAVE or BE to make longer verb phrases (mostly “continuous” tenses or “passive” forms), and some are used alone to describe a noun (similarly to, but not the same as, adjectives: see 245. Adjectives with a Participle Ending). For a full overview, see 52. Participles Placed Just after their Noun.
Participles are said to be “dangling” (= “badly connected”) if they are used in the adjective-like way without being properly linked to the the noun they are intended to be describing. This is a common error even among writers whose mother tongue is English, and is hence highlighted in most English coursebooks. My aim here is to explain and illustrate more exactly what “dangling” participles are, and to give more attention than is usual to ways of rewording them, demonstrating in the process that there is a surprising variety of choice.
.
HOW PARTICIPLES CAN BE “DANGLING”
The adjective-like nature of participles means they need a nearby noun to describe (an -ing verb without such a noun is likely to be not a participle but a gerund: see 71. Gerund and Participle Uses of “-ing”). Participles can describe their noun in different ways. Compare how plants is described in each of the following:
(a) PLANTS growing in poor soil will develop slowly.
(b) PLANTS use plenty of water, growing quickly as they do.
(c) Growing PLANTS need plenty of water.
(d) Growing in poor soil, PLANTS will develop slowly.
In (a), the participle growing directly follows plants, a use examined in this blog in 52. Participles Placed Just after their Noun. In (b), growing follows an entire statement about plants, a use that is the topic of 101. Add-On Participles. In (c), growing is like an adjective, located directly before plants, a use considered in 71. Gerund and Participle Uses of “-ing”.
In sentence (d), growing is again before its noun, but separated from it by a parenthesis-forming comma (see 294. Parentheses, #2). Joining it in the parenthesis is a preposition phrase (in poor soil), but elsewhere there might be an adverb (for example back-referring thus: see 289. Exotic Grammar Structures 8, #1), or an object or complement of the participle, or nothing at all. Sentences like (d) are the kind where “dangling” participles are usually found.
Growing in (d) is not a dangling participle, but consider the following:
(e) * Working in a city, traffic congestion is likely (to be met).
Working here is dangling because the noun it describes – something like you (= people) or drivers – is different from the one after the comma, traffic congestion. Strictly speaking, this makes the sentence nonsensical, implying “traffic congestion works in a city”. Compare this with sentence (d), where the noun after the comma, plants, is the one described by the participle growing.
If traffic congestion in (e) is corrected to you, the sentence might become:
(f) Working in a city, you are likely to meet traffic congestion.
.
WAYS OF AVOIDING A DANGLING PARTICIPLE
Before considering this question, it is as well to appreciate that some participles that seem to be dangling are generally considered correct and hence do not need to be avoided. These include participles at the start of a multi-word preposition, such as according (to), and participles whose understood subject is the writer, such as considering, ignoring, speaking and putting it (see 320. Special Participle Uses, #3 and #5).
There are at least four different ways to reword a sentence containing an unwanted dangling participle. Two of them seem to be particularly useful.
1. Changing the subject of the main verb
This is the strategy illustrated in (f) above, where the problematic traffic congestion has been moved elsewhere in the sentence and replaced by the real subject of the participle, you.
There will nearly always be an additional need to change the main verb in some way. The changed verb in (f) is the active form to meet instead of the original passive to be met. Active/passive changes are not always the solution, though: a completely different verb will often be needed. Here is another example. What noun might replace the only option, and how might the rest of the sentence be worded?
(g) *Surrounded on all sides, the only option was to surrender.
A likely subject of surrounded is the soldiers. Using this to start the second half of the sentence, we have to say something like … the soldiers could only surrender.
.
2. Replacing the participle with a conjunction construction
Sentence (e) can also be rewritten with if or when:
(h) If you work in a city, traffic congestion is likely to be met.
Conjunctions, such as if, are usually followed by an ordinary, non-participle verb. Since such verbs need a visible subject (you above), the problem of the verb being linked with the wrong subject is less likely. Be aware, though, that conjunctions sometimes have a participle instead of an ordinary verb after them (see 36. Words Left Out to Avoid Repetition), and if they are used in this way (e.g. If working in a city …), the problem of the dangling participle remains a possibility.
Another useful conjunction for avoiding a dangling participle is because (or its synonym as or since). It allows sentence (g), for example, to be reworded Because the soldiers were… .
.
3. Replacing the participle with a preposition
What preposition could replace taking in the following example?
(i) ?Taking a train, the journey lasts just two hours.
You could use either by (by train) or on (on a train) (see 73. Prepositions for Saying How). In general, a preposition may be usable when the participle is of the -ing kind with a following object (a train above – see 295. Options in Saying Where).
If there is no object after an -ing participle – as after working in sentence (e) above – a preposition substitution is not possible. This is because the object of the participle is needed as the compulsory following noun (“object”) of the preposition.
.
4. Adding a subject before the participle
This strategy is again useful when the participle is the -ing form of a verb requiring an object:
(j) *Analyzing the evidence, a decision is possible.
The participle subject that is needed here can be obtained by making the participle passive, so that its object the evidence takes on the subject role. It is quite common in such cases for the passive participle to include having:
(k) The evidence having been analyzed, a decision is possible.
Occasionally, such sentences are placed unchanged after with (or its negative equivalent without: see 310. Aspects of Negation, #5). More often, though, the addition of with(out) causes the removal of having been from the participle (With the evidence analyzed, …: see 267. Participles and Gerunds with “Having”).
.
PRACTICE EXERCISE: REWORDING SENTENCES CONTAINING DANGLING PARTICIPLES
Here are some more examples of dangling participles. The recommendation is to try and correct them in all four of the ways suggested above. The first two ways are always possible. Answers are suggested below.
Sentences
1. Visiting the Taj Mahal, a feeling of wonder took hold.
2. Being a close-knit society, networking is important.
3. Employed in a bookshop, there is a chance to become widely read.
4. Having eradicated illiteracy, everyone in the country benefits.
5. Starting with single words, complex linguistic knowledge can be slowly built up.
.
Suggested Answers (Others may be possible)
1(a) Visiting the Taj Mahal, they/the tourists were gripped by a feeling of wonder.
1(b) When they/the tourists visited the Taj Mahal, a feeling of wonder took hold.
1(c) At the Taj Mahal, a feeling of wonder took hold.
2(a) Being a close-knit society, they/the … consider networking important.
2(b) As they/the … are a close-knit society, networking is important.
3(a) Employed in a bookshop, one can become widely read.
3(b) If one is employed in a bookshop, there is a chance to become widely read.
4(a) Having eradicated illiteracy, the country benefits everyone.
4(b) Since illiteracy has been eradicated, everyone in the country benefits.
4(c) Illiteracy having been eradicated (or With illiteracy eradicated), everyone in the country benefits.
5(a) Starting with single words, one can slowly build up complex linguistic knowledge.
5(b) If one starts with single words, complex linguistic knowledge can be slowly built up.
5(c) From single words, complex linguistic knowledge can be slowly built up.
guinlist 