1

As I was studying on participles I came across the following sentence.

Shouting with happiness, William celebrated his chance to interview at SunTrust.

I know the participle phrase in the sentence modifies the William so the sentence is grammatically correct and what I understand from the sentence is that William shouted with happiness (first) and then celebrated his chance to interview.But even though he shouted first , I think, celebration and shouting may overlaps in terms of time also.But I am not certain about it.

My question is that what would the sentence imply if I changed present participles with past participles as the following:

Shouted with happiness, William celebrated his chance to interview at SunTrust.

Would it change the order of the actions or interval between the actions or stress on them?

migrated from english.stackexchange.com Mar 30 '16 at 1:57

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

  • 3
    It would not make sense and would not be ungrammatical in English. Shouting with happiness implies the action was ongoing when he celebrated. If you want a single action with shouting, you would have to do something like this: William shouted with happiness when etc. – Lambie Mar 29 '16 at 17:25
  • 2
    I would say that the 'shouting' and the 'celebrating' were co-occurring. Supplementary adjuncts like this are usually gerund-participials, so you can't change it to "shouted". – BillJ Mar 29 '16 at 17:46
  • There is no ing co-occurrence. – Lambie Mar 29 '16 at 18:36
  • 1
    @Lambie The salient interpretation is that the shouting was part of his celebrations. I'd call that co-occurring. – BillJ Mar 29 '16 at 20:12
  • Ok, let's try some others: Laughing out loud, he jumped into the pool. He was laughing out loud while he jumped into the pool. But that does not automatically mean he was laughing and jumping does it? During the past act of jumping, he was laughing. He was laughing when he jumped into the pool.....:) – Lambie Mar 29 '16 at 20:27
1

The present participle in the original sentence does mean that the action of shouting overlaps or occurs at the same time as celebrated. The first sentence does not mean that William shouted first and then he celebrated. If you want to say that you use the past participle:

Having shouted with happiness, William celebrated his chance...

The version you suggest, namely

Shouted with happiness, William celebrated his chance...

makes little sense. The way I would interpret that is that the past participle acts like a passive construction, and thus William was "shouted with happiness" by some agent, and that makes no sense at all.

A version that works is

Filled with happiness, William celebrated his chance...

which is short for

Being filled happiness...

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.