|
ESL Forum:
Techniques and methods
in Language Teaching
Games, activities
and teaching ideas
Grammar and
Linguistics
Teaching material
Concerning
worksheets
Concerning
powerpoints
Concerning online
exercises
Make suggestions,
report errors
Ask for help
Message board
|
ESL forum >
Grammar and Linguistics > A question to native speakers: participle clauses
A question to native speakers: participle clauses
|
ueslteacher
|
A question to native speakers: participle clauses
|
|
I �d like to know if perfect participle clause would be grammatically correct with the verbs of sense perception and motion (arrive, see, hear,enter, etc.)
I was taught that even when priority is meant, present participle should be used with the verbs of sense perception and motion, hense my question to native speakers.
Hearing the footsteps downstairs, he rushed to the door.
Having heard the footsteps downstairs, he rushed to the door.
|
14 Jan 2014
|
|
|
|
douglas
|
|
Both sound good to me, but that is just NS "gut" feeling--no support for it. |
14 Jan 2014
|
|
|
yanogator
|
|
I �d say that the second option implies that the hearing was at an earlier time, so it doesn �t work very well here. Hearing that tickets went on sale the next day, I hurried to the box office to be the first in line. (immediate response) Having heard that the band was coming to town, I wanted to be the first in line to buy tickets. (response happens at a later time) Bruce |
14 Jan 2014
|
|
|
ueslteacher
|
|
Thank you both, Bruce and Doug! That was what I suspected that both are gramatically correct but have a difference in meaning and depend on the time span between the two actions.
I wonder how it sounds to the British people...
|
15 Jan 2014
|
|
|
cunliffe
|
|
Well, Bruce is right (of course) that �having heard � implies a bit more of a distance between the hearing and the following action. However, I think most people would use them interchangeably and both are quite formal structures - definitely written expressions.
|
15 Jan 2014
|
|
|
