「Participle」詞組：以背景動作修飾 🏃🏻‍♀️

 

「Participle」詞組是在子句和句子中的修飾語詞組。它們會把動詞的動作變成副詞或形容詞，用來修飾其他子句中的元素。 如果你需要複習一下，「participle」詞組是指以動詞固定的「participle」形式開頭的詞組，詞組中亦會包含該動詞的要表達所需意思時的賓語和其他修飾語。 每個動詞有兩種固定的「participle」形式。一種是所謂的「present participle」，所有動詞都是加「 -ing」字尾轉化成這字形；另一種是所謂的「past participle」，不同動詞會有不同的，例如有些是加規則的「-ed」字尾，也有些會有不規則字尾或母音改變。 舉例來說，動詞 "eat" 的「present participle」是 "eating"。像 "eating ice-cream" 這樣以 "eating" 開頭的詞組，就是一個「present participle」詞組。 同一個動詞 "eat" 的「past participle」是 "eaten"。像 "eaten by the children" 這樣以 "eaten" 開頭的詞組，就是一個「past participle」詞組。 「Participle」詞組（包括「present participle」和「past participle」詞組）能夠把動作轉換成修飾語，用於句子中作描述。 例如： The man sitting next to me slept for ten hours. 坐在我旁邊的那個男人睡了十個小時。 這句中的 "sitting next to me" 是一個形容詞，用來修飾名詞詞組 "the man"。 這個詞組在這裡就像其他你熟悉的形容詞組一樣，為它所修飾的名詞增添描述。我們可以把它和其他類型的形容詞做比較： The tall man slept for ten hours. 那個高的男人睡了十個小時。 The man on the plane slept for ten hours. 飛機上的男人睡了十個小時。 The man sitting next to me slept for ten hours. 坐在我旁邊的那個男人睡了十個小時。 就如同形容詞 "tall" 和介詞組 "on the plane" 能為 "the man" 提供更多描述，「participle」詞組 "sitting next to me" 也是在為 "the man" 提供額外描述，指出是哪一位男人。 這裡亦可以看出，「participle」詞組 "sitting next to me" 包含了動詞 "sit" 的動作，這個動作被轉化為一個形容詞，來修飾名詞組 "the man"。整個名詞組 "the man sitting next to me" 的意思就是「坐在我旁邊的那個男人」。 在英文中，如果我們需要把一個動詞的動作轉化成修飾語，我們就需要把這個動詞（以及它的所需賓語等）轉換成一個「participle」字形的詞組。 「Present participle」詞組表達的是主動、正在進行的動作。例如，在 "the man sitting next to me" 這句話中，被修飾的名詞 "the man" 被形容為正在做出 "sit" 這個動作。 換句話說，作為形容詞，「participle」詞組 "sitting next to me" 所表達的是「正在做 sit next to me 這個動作的」。所以，用作形容 “the man”，就是「坐在我旁邊的男人」。 而「past participle」詞組則表達被動的動作。請看以下例句： The cake eaten by the children was not that sweet. 被孩子們吃掉的蛋糕不太甜。 "Eaten by the children" 這個「past participle」詞組是形容詞，用來修飾名詞 "the cake"。這個詞組所表達的是「被做 eat by the children 這個動作的」。所以 "the cake eaten by the children" 就是「被孩子們吃掉的蛋糕」。 這些例句雖然簡單，但已足以說明「participle」詞組如何把動作變成修飾語，讓我們能夠在句子中加入包含動作的描述。 事實上，「present participle」和「past participle」這兩個名稱其實非常誤導，因為「participle」詞組其實是一種非限定動詞形式（non-finite verb form）——也就是說，它們本身並不帶有時態。 只有限定動詞（finite verb）才具有時態。在子句中，有時態的限定動詞是核心動作。 例如： The man sitting next to me slept for ten hours. 坐在我旁邊的那個男人睡了十個小時。 The cake eaten by the children was not that sweet. 被孩子們吃掉的蛋糕不太甜。 在這兩個句子中，限定動詞分別是 "slept" 和 "was"，這兩個核心動詞有過去式。 而 "sitting" 和 "eaten" 只是 participles，本身並不包含時態，它們只是作為含有動作意涵的修飾語，並不是句子的核心動作。 我通常會建議學生這樣想：「participle」詞組表達的是「背景動作」，這個背景動作是與子句中限定動詞所表達的主要動作同時發生的。 例如在第一句中，句子的核心動作是 "slept"：「The man slept for ten hours」。這是子句中核心的動作，整個子句是圍繞它的。而在這個過去式時態語境中，我們額外描述了「the man」是在進行另一個背景動作的：「sitting next to me」。 "Sitting next to me" 本身並沒有時態，它只是一個背景動作，描述「那個男人」在執行核心動作 "slept for ten hours" 的期間，也同時在「背景」做什麼。 像 “sitting next to me” 這樣的「participle」詞組是依附於限定動詞那時態語境的。 同樣地，第二句的核心動作是 "was"：「The cake was not that sweet」。這是整句的核心動作。而「eaten by the children」這個「participle」詞組則提供了關於 "the cake" 的背景動作描述——這個蛋糕是在這過去式時態語境中「被吃掉的」。 這個「participle」詞組本身不包含時態，而只是存在於 "was not that sweet" 這個過去時態的語境中，作為「the cake」「被吃掉」的形容。 我以後會再找機會講解「participle」詞組，因為許多學生都會對這種結構感到困惑。

Participle Phrases: Background Actions as Descriptions 🏃🏻‍♂️ Participle phrases are modifier phrases in clauses and sentences. They allow us to turn the actions of verbs into adverbs and adjectives to modify other verbs and nouns. For those who need a refresher, participle phrases are phrases that start with a fixed “participle” form of a verb and include all of the verb’s objects and other modifiers.  Each verb has two fixed participle forms. One is the so-called “present participle” form -- which has the regular “-ing” ending -- and the other one is the so-called “past participle” form -- which, depending on the verb, can have the regular ending “-ed” or other irregular endings and/or vowel changes.  So, for example, the verb “eat” has the “present participle” form “eating.” A phrase like “eating ice-cream,” with “eating” at the start, is a “present participle” phrase.  The same verb “eat” has the “past participle” form “eaten.” A phrase like “eaten by the children,” with “eaten” at the start, is a “past participle” phrase.  As I said at the start, participle phrases (including both “present” and “past” participle phrases) allow us to turn actions into modifiers in clauses and sentences. For example:  The man sitting next to me slept for ten hours. 坐在我旁邊的那個男人睡了十個小時 For example, the participle phrase “sitting next to me” is an adjective to the noun phrase “the man” in this sentence.  This phrase, just like any other adjective you are familiar with, adds description to the noun phrase it is modifying. You can compare it with another types of adjectives:  The tall man slept for ten hours.  那個高的男人睡了十個小時 The man on the plane slept for ten hours.  飛機上的男人睡了十個小時 The man sitting next to me slept for ten hours. 坐在我旁邊的那個男人睡了十個小時 Just as the adjective “tall” and the prepositional phrase “on the plane” add description to the noun “the man” -- the participle phrase “sitting next to me” also serves this same function. It adds description to “the man” and points out which “man” it is.  As you can see, the participle phrase “sitting next to me” involves an “action” -- the action of the verb “sit.” It turns this action of “sitting” into an adjective for “the man.” The meaning expressed by the whole noun phrase “the man sitting next to me” is “坐在我旁邊的那個男人.” In English, if we need to turn the action of a verb into a modifier this way, we need to turn that verb (along with its objects etc.) into a participle phrase.  “Present” participle phrases express the meaning of an “active” action. For example, in “the man sitting next to me,” the meaning expressed is that the noun that is modified, “the man,” is the one doing the action of “sit” within the context of this sentence. In other words, as an adjective, “sitting next to me” expresses the meaning of “在做出 sit next to me 的動作的” -- so, “the man sitting next to me” is “坐在我旁邊的那個男人”  “Past” participle phrases, on the other hand, express the meaning of a “passive” action as a modifier. Let’s look at an example:  The cake eaten by the children was not that sweet.  被孩子們吃掉的蛋糕不太甜。 “Eaten by the children” is a “past” participle phrase. In this sentence, it is the adjective to the noun phrase “the cake.” The meaning expressed by this phrase is “被做 eat by the children 這動作的” -- so, “the cake eaten by the children” is “被孩子們吃掉的蛋糕.” These are very simple examples, but they illustrate how participle phrases turn verbs into modifiers so that we can include actions as descriptions. Now, the terms “present” and “past” participles are actually quite misleading because participle phrases are a type of non-finite verb form -- as in, there is no tense involved. The only verb form that has tense in a clause is the finite verb. The finite verb is the core verb in a clause -- it is the core action that takes place in the clause. For example:  The man sitting next to me slept for ten hours. 坐在我旁邊的那個男人睡了十個小時 The cake eaten by the children was not that sweet.  被孩子們吃掉的蛋糕不太甜。 In these sentences, the finite verbs are “slept” and “was” respectively. These two finite verbs have past tense. The participles “sitting” and “eaten” do not have any tense because they are participles. They only act as “modifiers containing actions” in this sentence. They are not actually the core actions of their respective sentences.  The way I usually tell students to think about it is -- participle phrases express “background actions” that are taking place at the same time as the core finite verb’s action in a clause.  For example, the first sentence, the core action is the one surrounding the finite verb “slept” -- “the man slept for ten hours.” This is the overall core action of the clause. Now, in the context of this clause, there is an added description that “the man” is doing the “background action of “sitting next to me.”  The “sitting next to me” itself doesn’t have tense -- it is just the “background action” that “the man” is said to be doing while the core action of “slept for ten hours” took place in the past tense. This participle phrase is dependent on the tense context provided by the finite verb “slept.”  Likewise, in the second sentence, the core action is the one surrounding the finite verb “was” -- “the cake was not that sweet.” This is the overall core action of the clause. Now, in the context of this clause, there is an added description that “the cake” is “being done” the “background action” of “eaten by the children.” “Eaten by the children” itself doesn’t have tense -- it is just the “background action” involving “the cake” within the past tense context of the finite verb “was.” I will find other opportunities to talk more about participle phrases as many students find them confusing.

Best,  Ms. Charlotte