Outgoing US President Bush declared the summit a success, saying the leaders are committed to pro-growth policies. The meeting agreed on an action plan to assure smoother functioning of financial markets and said developing countries should have more say in the weighted voting structure of the International Monetary Fund, a provider of emergency loans to countries in need.

I could not get context meaning here. could you explain ?

Here , "saying , leaders" are noun. is not it?
"Leaders" is a noun. "Saying" is not a noun.
(is not exactly)

As I see it, "saying - - - policies." is a participial phrase, modifying the verb "declared." In another context, "saying" could be a gerund/noun, as in " 'A penny saved is a penny earned' is an old saying."

I believe in your example, the participal takes a direct object, which happens to be a clause. (Saying what?) "Leaders is indeed a noun, as subject of the clause, "the leaders are committed to pro-growth policies."

- A.

Edit. Sorry, I didn't see your question about the context.

Following the economic conference of major world leaders (summit), Bush made an announcement. He said the meeting was successful, and he went on to explain, in his view, what the meeting accomplished and what the leaders agreed on.

He declared X, saying Y. (The direct object of the participle, "saying," doesn't have to be a clause. For example, "He declared bankruptcy, saying nothing," and "nothing" would be a noun, as direct object of "saying.")
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
AvangiAs I see it, "saying - - - policies." is a participial phrase,
Indeed, you are right - it is a participial pharase. But it functions here as an adjective, modifying "President Bush" - he was the one saying. It is clearer when the sentence is re-phrased:
President Bush, saying the leaders are committed to pro-growth policies, declared the summit a success.
Hi, A/S,
I debated that, and decided I wasn't qualified to say whether is was adjectival, modifying "Bush," or adverbial, modifying the verb. Not wanting to give Bush more credit than he deserves, I opted for the verb.

Could you give me some advice on how to make that decision?

Cheers, - A.
Hi A:
I've had a hard decision on this too. Many grammar references I have read insist that present and past participles can only work as adjectives, for example
Present participles, verbals ending in -ing, and past participles, verbals that end in -ed (for regular verbs) or other forms (for irregular verbs), are combined with complements and modifiers and become part of important phrasal structures. Participial phrases always act as adjectives.

http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/627/02 /
participle is a verbal that is used as an adjective and most often ends in -ing or -ed. The term verbal indicates that a participle, like the other two kinds of verbals, is based on a verb and therefore expresses action or a state of being. However, since they function as adjectives, participles modify nouns or pronouns. There are two types of participles: present participles and past participles. Present participles end in -ing. Past participles end in -ed, -en, -d, -t, or -n, as in the words asked, eaten, saved, dealt, and seen.

Even though this is the case, writers often misuse participles, so they come out mangled in a syntax analysis. There is an excellent treatment on the subject by Fowler ("The King's English") Bartleby's is a great site with many reference works you can access on-line.

Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Many thanks, A/S for your comprehensive answer. I hope I can make the most of it. (It will take me some time to fully digest it.)

Best regards, - A.