I read in Advanced Grammer In Use that sometimes the participle clause has its own subject, like:

The collection of vases is priceless, some being over two thousand years old.

According to the above rule, I want to write the same sentence for this snapshot, https://ieltsmaterial.com/ielts-academic-writing-task-1-map-band-9-model-sample/, like below. Is the below sentence correct?

The evergreen trees on the west of the district do not undergo a change in their numbers, some grown on the east of the island demolishing,

  • No, your second version isn't syntactically valid. Note that although it's "valid" to "front" the participial clause in the first (Some being over two thousand years old, the collection of vases is priceless), this would be extremely unnatural for that specific example. But your example starts with the word while, which unlike some, is NOT a "subject" for the participial clause*. I'm not sure exactly what your example is trying to say, so I can't easily come up with a "valid" version that does include its own subject within a participial clause. Jul 3, 2020 at 12:24
  • ...also note that whole purpose of the first example is to showcase the use of some as an "embedded subject" in the participial clause. Overriding the normal default, whereby the subject would be assumed to be preceding collection, rather than some [vases]. Jul 3, 2020 at 12:26
  • @FumbleFingersReinstateMonica I slightly changed the sentence and added some information about what I want to do.
    – user115852
    Jul 3, 2020 at 12:36
  • oic. Now your text is (almost) syntactically valid. But it doesn't work because demolishing (tearing down, destroying) is the wrong participle. The word you probably want there is diminishing (getting less, shrinking). Jul 3, 2020 at 12:44
  • ...BUT semantically it still doesn't really make sense, because you're saying the population [as a whole?] remains constant, AT THE SAME TIME AS (the "purpose" of including a participial phrase) you're saying that in some areas, it's going down. Jul 3, 2020 at 12:48

1 Answer 1


I am not sure that I fully agree with FumbleFingers' assertion that

The collection of vases is priceless, some being over 2000 years old

is extremely unnatural. I agree I'd prefer as a matter of style

The collection of vases, some [being] over 2000 years old, is priceless.

But the key point is that "some being over 2000 years old" is a modifier of "vases" that explains "priceless. I am not sure that it is helpful to think of "some" as an independent subject in this case, but I will not argue about what people call things.

Leaving aside the fact that "demolishing" makes no sense in this context, your variant does not work because you are not modifying "trees on the west" with "grown," but introducing a whole new, contrasting subject. Moreover, if you meant "decreasing," "some" does not make sense if you are talking about the entire population.

The population of evergreens growing in the west of the district is stable, but that growing in the east is declining

is grammatical. And I'd prefer to say that "that" is the subject of "is" and "growing" modifies that subject. But let's not argue about names.

You must log in to answer this question.