I'm confused with these sentences. Can you point out what's wrong and what's correct for me?
- Heard the voice, he responded immediately.
- Hearing the voice, he responded immediately.
-
11 would be fine if you put "having" in front of "heard" like this: Having heard the voice, he responded immediately. – sooeithdk Oct 11 '15 at 2:03
-
Belongs in ELL Stack Exchange. – Hot Licks Oct 11 '15 at 21:49
-
I don't think this needs closing: in Latin, for example, both would be fine. Precisely why a past participle needs 'having' while a past participle does not (but could, for example, be on hearing) is not obvious. – TimLymington Oct 11 '15 at 21:54
Add a comment
|
Your #2 example is okay, but #1 needs work:
*Heard the voice, he responded immediately.
"Heard" is either (1) a past tense form ("He heard the voice"), (2) a perfect participle ("He has heard the voice"), or (3) a passive participle ("The voice is heard").
For (1), you need to supply a subject, then use a subordinate conjunction to connect the two clauses:
When he heard the voice, he responded immediately.
For (2), since it's a perfect, "have" must be supplied:
Having heard the voice, he responded immediately.
When he had heard the voice, he responded immediately.
For (3), the passivized object (now a subject) must precede:
When the voice was heard, he responded immediately.
?? The voice heard, he responded immediately.
? The voice having been heard, he responded immediately.
I've given my opinions about the acceptability of the examples with: asterisk for really bad, question mark for a little odd, two question marks for quite odd.
