In Commas^x, Gerunds^x

It's a mighty feast, and one that I'm still trying to digest, so my responses may seem short and/or out of form, but they're not. I'd rather work from where you three have left off, then go back into the discussion and dredge up old hat, sort to speak. RE: These constructions are capable of...

At risk of becoming a 'participle bore', some further thoughts: 1. . Take these variants: a) After I had eaten the apple, I fixed the bike. b) After my eating the apple, the bike was fixed. c) Having eaten the apple, I fixed the bike. d) After eating the apple, I fixed the bike. It seems to me...

Hello Komountain 1. I would say yes. You can test the link between the clauses by inserting the 'after' clause after the subject of the main clause: 'After eating lunch, the boy fixed the bike' > 'The boy, after eating lunch, fixed the bike' - correct. 'After eating lunch, the bike was fixed'...

Correct, but the reason is grammatical. 'In preference to' is prepostional and takes a noun (gerund) object. It has nothing to do with the occurrence of the abolition. And check your commas-- there should be two or none.

Don't be too upset about participles! Most -native- English speakers have no idea what they are. Participles are a kind of word called a "verbal." A verbal is a verb that takes the place of another part of speech (noun, adjective, etc.) The PRESENT PARTICIPLE is a verb that ends in "ing" and...

Do each of these sentences contain a gerund: I was pleased with your helping your sister. The teacher appreciated our listening to the speaker. Through practice, she had improved her swimming. (is the comma in the right place?) They awed the audience with their public speaking. My mother...