Abra Staffin-Wiebe (
abracanabra) wrote2008-12-31 05:36 pm
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Entry tags:
Grammar Help, Please.
I can't find the correct terminology for this sentence construction, and it has been driving me mad! What is it called when you use a comma to join an independent and a dependent clause without a conjunction--correct only if they describe actions that switch tense from past to present.
For example, "She ran for the door, grabbing her purse as she went."
Would the second clause be a coordinate verb phrase?
I know this is rather technical, but it's bugging me a lot to not be able to use the correct terminology when noting incorrect use.
For example, "She ran for the door, grabbing her purse as she went."
Would the second clause be a coordinate verb phrase?
I know this is rather technical, but it's bugging me a lot to not be able to use the correct terminology when noting incorrect use.
no subject
no subject
The sentence looks correct, yes?
Most of my grammar understanding is self-taught, which means I'm missing correct terms for a lot of it.
no subject
As is mine. When you're learning grammar from reading, they very rarely include the terms for the sentence structure they use. But, your example sentence looks correct to me as well.
no subject
~~~~
Ok, I dug a little, and the part after the comma is apparently a participle phrase--"grabbing" is a participle in this case (there's a wikipedia article about gerunds vs. participles that's not extremely illuminating), and it's not a dependent/subordinate clause because it has no object. Here's a good page about it: http://www.siskiyous.edu/class/engl52/reynoldss/n_participles.htm
"coordinate verb phrase" may be a linguistics superset that includes participle phrases as well as other things--google doesn't find that term in any grammar handy-notes stuff as far as I can tell, but does find it in a couple of language description docs, including this pretty interesting PDF about the Telugu language of India.
I had some formal grammar instruction, but it was 1000 years ago, so it's mostly slipped into the abyss of memory.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Or, at least, identified it.