posted
I occassionally use participle phrases at the beginning of sentences, depending on a number of factors - the structure of the sentence, other sentences surrounding it, the tone of the paragraph, etc. I don't feel that I overuse this (maybe once every several paragraphs); however, I have recently read various things (critiques mostly) suggesting that these should be avoided at all costs. Is this the general consensus, and if so, why?
Posts: 2003 | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Chicago has seventeen rules on participles and participial phrases. Only one of them is prohibitive, and that for the dangling participle or participial phrase. Dangling modifiers are confusing because they're separated by another phrase or word from the subject, predicate, or object they are meant to modify. Rather than avoiding at all costs, danglers shouldn't be used at all. Yet they are quite common in emerging writer's compositions. One of my editor-mentors says they're becoming ever more common lately.
I've encountered workshoppers who point to a participle or participial phrase and say it's not generally a best writing practice. If structured properly, participles and participial phrases are perfectly acceptable in formal or informal English writing. If what is being targeted is a suspected dangling modifier, then it should be dissected to see what makes it dangling and then recast. I've encountered many that are danglers, in my own writing too. Out demon dangler, Out!
An example of a dangling participial phrase;
Before going to bed, the alarm clock woke me from a nap.
The sentence's noun-subject modified by the action of the participial phrase is me, not the alarm clock. The phrase is a dangling modifier. Recast;
Before going to bed, I was roused from a nap by the alarm clock.
philocinemas, if there's any writer who would benefit from possessing a copy of Chicago I think you will. It's available in several forms, a freeware thirty-day trial online, an annual online subscription, $30 per year; a CD-ROM disc, $60; or in hardcopy, $55; both CD and book, $100. A facsimile of the first edition is available for free in pdf, 20 MBs.
posted
I do not believe I have been dangling my participles. Although, I have often been mistaken in the past. I will consider a subscription to Chicago, but I keep several resources available to me at present - Harbraces, The Elements of Style, and Revising Fiction by David Madden.
My question stemmed from what I read in the Turkey City Lexicon regarding "Ing Disease" and comments of various critiquers, warning against using "-ing words" at the beginning of sentences - warnings they received from editors.
My question was more of stylistic in nature. Is there a preference for writers not to use participle phrases at the beginning of sentences similar to the preference for them not to use passive voice?
Here are two examples to which you can refer(one has already been posted in a first 13):
"Arising from life’s fertile garden, there is a microcosm where the seeds of change dance within a rose-colored sphere."
"Looking up from an eyepiece protruding out of one of the world’s largest and most powerful microscopes, he had a seldom-experienced moment of elation..."
posted
Ah, that pesky gerund formation-ing, ing, ing. Yes, there is a school that opposes the gerund participle, especially beginning sentences with one. Perhaps it's a product of superclose scrutiny for danglers. A gerund word is commonly the hallmark of a dangling participle. Finding no dangling participles but focusing attention on all gerunds and finding them irritating, the manuscript was rejected by the acquisition editor. However, there's no rule against and lots of support in common usage for initial gerunds.
The difficulty of a gerund participle is it can be a verb, a noun, or both at once. Looking and the similar gerund word thinking are more difficult to unravel than most gerunds. Throw in a precedent possesive pronoun and the riot is on in grammarian circles.
The issue of beginning a sentence with a gerund is it places preeminence on the participial phrase and leads to vagueness of the sentence's subject and predicate.
Neither of your two examples is grammatically unsound. They are to my eye a bit awkward in isolation. As the beginning of a story, perhaps at the beginning of a paragraph without a preceding context, I'd find them atrocious. As they are though, they're poetic and intriguing.
quote:Before going to bed, I was roused from a nap by the alarm clock.
Please notice that the participle requires the main part of the sentence to be in passive format (that is, the subject of the sentence is the object of the action), so it is something to be used carefully for that reason if no others.
Phrases starting with -ing words imply things happening at the same time, and if they can't happen at the same time, or if they create confusing images, then that can be a reason to use them cautiously as well.
quote:Please notice that the participle requires the main part of the sentence to be in passive format (that is, the subject of the sentence is the object of the action), so it is something to be used carefully for that reason if no others.
But this isn't always true:
Using my last bit of strength, I pulled ahead of the competition and won the race.
or
Before going to bed, I drank a nightcap and read a book.
[This message has been edited by annepin (edited September 01, 2008).]
posted
Oh, yeah, not always, but it did happen in the example I quoted, and I just wanted to point it out.
Posts: 8826 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
