I came across this website. One member says this:
"If it (present participle) comes after the main phrase, that is what he did afterwards. " And gives example:
a- Tom took off his hat, putting it on the table.
As far as I know, using the present participle after the main clause could indicate what happened as a result. For example:
b- The bomb exploded, destroying the building. (As a result, the building destroyed.)
Is that member right? Can we use "present participle" right after the main clause to indicate "what happened next" even though "what happened next" wasn't the result of the main action as in sentence a?
I think these versions are better than sentence a:
c- Tom took off his hat, then putting it on the table.
d- Tom took off his hat and then put it on the table.