3

I want to understand the overall structure and the meaning of the following sentence. I want also an explanation of the use of comma and the the ing verb looking here:

Later, Mr. Drigant’s grandson walked by, looking dejected.

migrated from english.stackexchange.com May 31 '14 at 11:28

This question came from our site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts.

  • 1
    This question appears to be off-topic on English Language & Usage. It would be better asked on English Language Learners. – Janus Bahs Jacquet May 31 '14 at 10:42
  • The verb looking is used here as a present participle, "A verb form that indicates an ongoing action or state in the present and which can function as an adjective." – Damkerng T. May 31 '14 at 18:44
  • I tried to find the rule that describes these two commas. I could not find! It is neither an appositive usage nor a non-essential adjective. This is a good question (+1). I guess the first comma is in its place with some rule that has nothing to do with the second comma. The first comma is placed as we do it after a word that tells us when something has happened. For instance -- Once you reach, kindly call and confirm. Looking dejected means he appeared dejected. It's the same usage as we say Looking beautiful means someone is looking beautiful. – Maulik V Jun 9 '14 at 10:58
1

Often when there are two commas in a sentence, the text between the commas is an (optional) parenthetical reference. For example:

Mr. Drigant's grandson, looking dejected, walked by.

means

Mr. Drigant's grandson walked by. Mr. Drigant's grandson looked dejected.

The original example does not have a parenthetical reference between the commas. Instead, it has two independent uses of commas.

Later, Mr. Drigant's grandson walked by, looking dejected.

means

Later, Mr. Drigant's grandson walked by. Mr. Drigant's grandson walked by, looking dejected.

which means

Mr. Drigant's grandson walked by later. Mr. Drigant's grandson looked dejected.

Both of the examples that have two commas in a single sentence let you eliminate duplication. The "Later," example lets you change the location of the word "later". The "walked by, looking dejected" example lets you change the verb tense slightly.

1

Mr. Drigant’s grandson walked by, looking dejected.

"Looking" in this context means "appearing to be", that is, his face and his body language indicated he was sad. He seemed sad.

He looked at the cake. The cake looked delicious.

P.S. The "looking dejected" clause lacks a relative pronoun to connect it to a noun in the main or "matrix" clause ("who was") because it is an adverbial-adjectival clause describing the grandson's appearance as he was walking. A relative pronoun would restrict the modifier to adjectival-only. Lacking the relative pronoun the clause can be placed at the end of the sentence after the verb; with a relative pronoun the clause could not be placed there.

0

Later, Mr. Drigant’s grandson walked by, looking dejected.

I want you to look at the statement very carefully and think 'Why do we use comma in a sentence?' We use comma to pause and to break down a sentence into pieces.

Look at the statement above again and imagine reading it without the commas. Does it make sense? It does, but it changes the meaning too.

Later Mr. Brown's grandson walked by looking dejected = Mr. Brown's grandson walked by looking at you. In your sentence you have used gerund+past participle (Verb) and I just swapped verb (dejected) to the noun to make you understand better.

Now, read this. 'Later, Mr Brown's grandson walked by, he was looking dejected.' This is what the statement says.

I am not proving the statement wrong. The point is, 'how you want to put it'. It is always the author's choice to choose the pattern of writing.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.