1

Here, the venerable author listed a gamut of present participle usages. In this context, he or she introduced some types of verbs which can be followed by present participles:

  1. The present participle after verbs of movement & position.
  2. The present participle after verbs of perception.
  3. The present participle with the verbs spend and waste.
  4. The present participle with the verbs catch and find

Now, consider below sentence that I constructed:

  1. The stability of the system has been analyzed using LP method.
  2. The effect of heat on the circuit has been studied considering unbound environment.
  3. This masterpiece was drawn using watercolor.
  4. Illustrations were created exploiting SoftwareX.

And a myriad of the other examples. Now, I have two questions:

1) Did I find just new verbs that should be memorized?

2) Has this something to do with using passives?

Cardinal
  • 6,025
  • 11
  • 52
  • 114
  • Your first two constructions are syntactically invalid, and the second two are exactly the same construction anyway (adverbial clauses based on *using*). But I don't understand what you're asking about here. – FumbleFingers Jun 15 '16 at 17:09
  • @FumbleFingers I changed substituted "using" by "exploiting". About the syntax of the two first sentences I am not sure that I understood you 100 percent. The question is very clear. I am asking should I create a new list for verbs that are followed by present participles in passive voice? verbs like "analyze", "study", ... to – Cardinal Jun 15 '16 at 17:17
  • The first four examples in your link show two completely different usages. In the first two, *shopping* and *running* are effectively nouns referring to two different activities. But in the next two, *looking up at the clouds* and *running towards me* are adverbial clauses modifying *lay, came*. I don't see how anyone could usefully think in terms of "a list of verbs" relevant to such a range of contexts. But you might find this page helpful. – FumbleFingers Jun 15 '16 at 17:38

1 Answers1

3

No, and No.

This is not the present participle after anything. This is a present participle introducing an adverbial clause: the participle (as opposed to the clause) has no role whatever in the main sentence, because the main sentence can't "see" it.

Colin Fine
  • 75,266
  • 4
  • 98
  • 158
  • Thanks, so present participle can be always used in the structures like: something + has been/is/was done + present participle ? – Cardinal Jun 15 '16 at 19:56
  • NO. A present participle can often be used in the structure present participle + object(s) to form an adverbial phrase. This is completely independent of what verbs or other material might happen to be in the main clause. The structure you have mentioned in you comment does not exist. – Colin Fine Jun 15 '16 at 23:07
  • Thus, you mean we can use adverbial clauses arbitrarily? – Cardinal Jun 16 '16 at 09:53
  • Grammatically, yes, @Cardinal. Of course it may not make sense with all verbs. – Colin Fine Jun 16 '16 at 17:00