1

In the following sentence, why did they use "thinking" after the comma? Is a word omitted after the comma?

I waited for two months, thinking that it would be bad time for him.

Should it be something like "I waited for two months and now I am thinking that it would be bad time for him."?

In this sentence below (describing League of Legends), like I said above, is something like a word omitted after the comma? I just cannot figure out why they type something like this, I mean it seems more like a present continuous tense without "subject+be".

While Two-Shiv poison is not on cooldown, Shaco's basic attacks poison his targets, slowing them for 2 seconds and causing minions and monsters to ...

Improve this question
5
  • 3
    Could you please take a look at the formatting help for this website and format your question properly? Frankly, it's painful to read.
    – Crazy Eyes
    Jul 29, 2015 at 15:43
  • 1
    sorry... it's the first time that i have used this website. i will format my question as soon as possible.
    – 오준수
    Jul 29, 2015 at 15:52
  • In the second sentence, which comma are you talking about?
    – Chad
    Jul 29, 2015 at 18:10
  • 2
    I waited on the street corner for half an hour, thinking a taxi would drive by. But no taxi appeared, and I had to walk home.
    – TimR
    Jul 29, 2015 at 18:27
  • What is the source of the first sentence? Part of the meaning of this sentence is context-dependent.
    – Jasper
    Jul 29, 2015 at 18:34

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
2

thinking that it would be bad time for him.
slowing them for 2 seconds and causing minions and monsters to

These are participle clauses acting as clausal supplements; and the -ing forms which head them are present participles (or active participles)

Internally, a participle takes the same dependents (subject, object, complements and modifiers) as other forms of the verb; but externally, in the sentence, the participle (with its dependents) plays the role of some other wordclass.

For instance, participle clauses can act as attributive adjectives, just like ordinary adjectives. If the participle has no following dependents, it may be placed before the noun it modifies; otherwise it is placed after the noun:

The quickly running child fell down.
The child running across the playground fell down.

In your examples, however, the participle clauses "modify" the entire main clause to which they are attached. The exact significance of that "modification" has to be inferred from the context.

  • In the first, the missing subject of thinking is inferred to be the subject of the main clause I, and the participle clause expresses the motive for the action of the main clause: I waited because I thought it would be a bad time.

  • In the second, the missing subject of slowing and causing is inferred to be the entire main clause, the action of poisoning, and the participle clause expresses the result of that action: poisoning the targets caused them to be slowed and caused minions and monsters to (something-or-other).

Note, by the way, that a clause headed by an active participle can also act as a noun; when that is the case we call the -ing form a gerund rather than a participle.

Slowing them for 2 seconds turned out to be a bad idea, because it gave their minions time to catch up with them.

Improve this answer
7
  • I think i have fully got it!! The whole explanation,worded by you,means that the second clause(also called participle phrase) functions as adjective,modifying the first clause.right? In a sense,i can attribute the second clause as INDIVIDUAL adjective.as in "i use a iphone to send some music to her,hearing that she likes listening to the music" or it can also be like"i use a iphone to send some music to her,thinking that she will like (listening to the music)/(me more better)
    – 오준수
    Jul 30, 2015 at 12:09
  • @오준수 If you've fully got it you're way ahead of me! But Yes: Your two iphone sentences are of the first type I described: each of the participle clauses takes "I" as its subject, and describes why you sent her the music.
    – StoneyB on hiatus
    Jul 30, 2015 at 12:18
  • Could you explain about participle clause taking "he/she" or "they" or something like this? Would it be like"he uses a iphone to send some music to her,thinking that she will like him more better"? Or it would not make any sense if i only change subject without reforming the whole sentence? I was wrong..actually i think my english grammar of this part just hits level 1 - - i am still a super noob ㅠ.ㅠ
    – 오준수
    Jul 30, 2015 at 17:47
  • @오준수 I'm not sure what you're asking. A participle does not inflect for person or number to agree with its subject.
    – StoneyB on hiatus
    Jul 30, 2015 at 17:53
  • You was like"each of the participle clause takes i as the subject" .does it mean i only could use "i" with this kind of grammar if i want to make a sentence like this? Is there any other examples about this grammar? As in"tony nervously watched the woman,alarmed by the clock" in this case,the subject is not "i" but it also makes sense,right?. Maybe i misunderstand your explanation. I was thinking that only "i" could use with this grammar..(sorry..i am a english beginer,sometimes.my words may confuse you ..
    – 오준수
    Jul 30, 2015 at 18:02
0

The first sentence is correct. It has the meaning

I waited for two months, with the intent that [or being aware that] it would be a bad time for him.

In other words, it sounds like the speaker wanted it to be a bad time for "him", and so the speaker waited for two months, because the speaker believed such a wait would ensure that it was a "bad time".

The second sentence is also perfectly good usage. The part you're asking about could be rephrased as

...Shaco's basic attacks poison his targets, which slows them down for 2 seconds...

But the way it's written is simply a slightly more efficient way of saying the same thing.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .