Sentences with present particple only - grammatical/acceptable?

pellshek

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
56
Reaction score
7
Hi all,

I want to ask if sentences like the 3 examples below are grammatical/acceptable usage. The point at issue is sentences with no verb other than a present participle.

Example 1:

I entered the room. It was big and bright. People wandering around, waiters carrying trays of drinks.
Here, it appears there's no verb acting on the "people" and "waiters" in third sentence, other than the participles. The only verbs in passage relate to me (looking) and the room (was), not the people or waiters.

Example 2:


The place was crowded with people. Rushing about in a panic. Running to catch trains. Standing on the platform.
This strikes me as slightly different because the verb "was crowded" in first sentence sort of carries forward: the verb is sort of implicitly working on the participle sentences (unlike Example 1 where the verbs are acting on me and the room, not the people.)

Example 3:

The place was crowded with people; rushing about in a panic, running to catch trains, standing on the platform
Same sentence as Eg. 2, only this time with a comma/semi-colon rather than a full stop between the verby part of the sentence and the participle parts. This kinda connects the verb in main clause more clearly to part 2 of sentence.

..........

I hesitate to say Examples 1 and 2 are present participle phrases because my understanding is that PPPs modify nouns that have their own verbs in the main clause of a sentence. That doesn't appear to be the case in 1 and 2.

I am unsure about Example 3, which does look a bit more like a present participle phrase, modifying "people" in the clause that also has a verb. But I'm really not sure.

Fwiw, I understand we can reconstruct any of these into normal SVO form. "People were wandering around..." etc.

Thanks.
 

King Neptune

Banned
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
4,253
Reaction score
372
Location
The Oceans
Your examples are not sentences. They are participial clauses. If you want grammatical sentences, then you probably should use a comma as the separator.
 

Jamesaritchie

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
27,863
Reaction score
2,311
I can see certain POV characters speaking like this, but it would get old extremely fast. A page of it would drive me bonkers.
 

blacbird

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
36,987
Reaction score
6,158
Location
The right earlobe of North America
Those are nominal sentences, they're fine.

No, they're not. They are sentence fragments. Now, in informal writing, like fictional narrative, there are uses for sentence fragments and many fine writers use them. But they do tend to call attention to themselves, stylistically, and a big tsunami of them would get tedious in a hurry, as JAR has said.

caw
 

TheNighSwan

Banned
Joined
Oct 20, 2013
Messages
398
Reaction score
54
Location
France
So you're saying they're to be used sparingly and with care, pretty much like any other stylistic device ever?
 

cornflake

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
16,171
Reaction score
3,734
The OP asked if they were grammatically correct and acceptable. They're not. That doesn't mean someone can't stick fragments or grammatically-incorrect sentences or etc. in their work, but doing so doesn't make them correct. Have to know the rules to be able to break the rules.

The semicolon doesn't help there, btw, OP; it's still not a sentence.
 

guttersquid

I agree with Roxxsmom.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
1,324
Reaction score
229
Location
California, U.S.A.
All three are grammatically incorrect, and all three are acceptable in fiction, except for the semicolon in #3. No punctuation required in that spot.
 

RSwordsman

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 8, 2013
Messages
109
Reaction score
3
Location
Port St. Lucie, FL
All three are grammatically incorrect, and all three are acceptable in fiction, except for the semicolon in #3. No punctuation required in that spot.

Agreed; I wouldn't use any of the quoted examples. But if that sort of pace is absolutely necessary, I guess it could be chalked up to artistic license.
 

Ken

Banned
Kind Benefactor
Joined
Dec 28, 2007
Messages
11,478
Reaction score
6,198
Location
AW. A very nice place!
I entered the room. It was big and bright. People wandering around, waiters carrying trays of drinks.

Grammatically OK. The verb (were) is understood.
Logistically it is questionable. Conventional construction, in terms of content, should have sentence 3 related and following from 2. Something like:

I entered the room. It was big and brightbusy with activity. People wandering around, waiters carrying trays of drinks.

Then readers know what to expect.

Actually, though, the 3rd might better be punctuated like this.

People, wandering around; waiters, carrying trays of drinks.

That's how I'd do it in any event, if I decided to.
 
Last edited:

pellshek

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
56
Reaction score
7
Thanks for replies all.

The OP asked if they were grammatically correct and acceptable.

For brevity I stuck those two together, but really I was wondering about grammatical and/or acceptable. Either would be fine for me. Strict grammatical correctness is less important I think than whether it's acceptable/reads ok/doesn't hurt the eyes or ears/communicates meaning.

...........

What about this one, to convey motion, urgency. (Let's say this is MC, and we're in a close-ish 3rd Person, meaning we're kinda narrating neutrally but kinda in his POV too):

Example 4

He burst through the front doors, pistol in hand. The concourse was bedlam; people in motion, the sounds of a stampede. Flashing lights, blaring alarms. Panicky parents with their crying kids, a group of teenagers dashing for the nearest exit. All around, sliding shoes slipping over glossy tiles. Nearby, three security guards running around in confused circles. Bedlam. The place was bedlam.
(Fwiw, not all those -ing words are present particples, some are adjectives I believe. But there are some participle-only fragments within the sequence.)

To my ear this sounds ok wrt the participles - they're kinda hidden in the middle of it all, they don't break the rhythm, they aren't glaringly grammatically wrong such that they hurt your ear, they communicate the sort of blurry urgency that the whole sequence is aiming for.

(Fwiw I just made up that example on the spot without thinking, so you'll forgive any stylistic or other grammar issues. It's the use of participles I'm wondering about for now.)
 

Chase

It Takes All of Us to End Racism
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
9,239
Reaction score
2,316
Location
Oregon, USA
I just made up that example on the spot without thinking, so you'll forgive any stylistic or other grammar issues.

It may seem unkind, but the example kinda reads like one kinda made up on the spot without thinking about its unforgivably confusing punctuation, grammar errors, and kinda overdone "ing" and other repetition.
 

ArtsyAmy

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
Messages
494
Reaction score
57
Example 4 sounds fine to me (as a just-for-example example). Until a year or so ago, I was all perfecty-perfect with grammar in a novel I've been working on for years. Feedback from one agent I queried included compliments, but also that she couldn't connect with the narrative as she had hoped (or something like that). I wasn't sure what she meant. Some time later, I read an old post from Bufty about writing as if the character has a movie camera on his shoulder (helps with showing vs. telling). Went back to my manuscript, saw what the problem was with the narrative. Went through the whole thing with my imaginary movie camera, changed lots of grammatically perfect sentences to fragments (like yours), and wow, the narrative came to life. And it's so liberating to write fragments! Done judiciously, of course.
 
Last edited:

pellshek

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
56
Reaction score
7
It may seem unkind, but the example kinda reads like one kinda made up on the spot without thinking about its unforgivably confusing punctuation, grammar errors, and kinda overdone "ing" and other repetition.

Not at all. I welcome people being unkind. There's way too much pandering and making nicey-nice about poor writing on writing sites.

So how about we make a deal?

I'll hold my hands up to not being Nabokov if you hold your hands up to being off-topic.

Whaddayasay?
 

guttersquid

I agree with Roxxsmom.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
1,324
Reaction score
229
Location
California, U.S.A.


Actually, though, the 3rd might better be punctuated like this.

People, wandering around; waiters, carrying trays of drinks.



That semicolon would be incorrect. The clauses on both sides of a semicolon must be independent. Neither can be a fragment.
 

Chase

It Takes All of Us to End Racism
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
9,239
Reaction score
2,316
Location
Oregon, USA
I'll hold my hands up to not being Nabokov if you hold your hands up to being off-topic.

My comments are directly on topic. No one needs permission to use fragments. Most writers use them judiciously, as Amy said. I'm saying other aspects of punctuation, grammar, redundant construction, etcetera always affects reading of any passage.
 

pellshek

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
56
Reaction score
7
pellshek, in Ex. #4, you're still misusing the semicolon.


Thanks GS. It doesn't connect two independent but related clauses, and it's not an internally punctuated list requiring separation by SCs for clarity.
 

cornflake

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
16,171
Reaction score
3,734
Thanks for replies all.



For brevity I stuck those two together, but really I was wondering about grammatical and/or acceptable. Either would be fine for me. Strict grammatical correctness is less important I think than whether it's acceptable/reads ok/doesn't hurt the eyes or ears/communicates meaning.

To some people, grammatically incorrect usage is not ok, and does hurt communication. I said in another thread that I don't put much weight into the first sentence of a novel; it doesn't have to grab me. If it's grammatically incorrect, however, I'm instantly out.

There's room for style, but you've got a pervasive thing here that's just wrong. If you want to do it, do it, but ...

...........

What about this one, to convey motion, urgency. (Let's say this is MC, and we're in a close-ish 3rd Person, meaning we're kinda narrating neutrally but kinda in his POV too):

Example 4

(Fwiw, not all those -ing words are present particples, some are adjectives I believe. But there are some participle-only fragments within the sequence.)

To my ear this sounds ok wrt the participles - they're kinda hidden in the middle of it all, they don't break the rhythm, they aren't glaringly grammatically wrong such that they hurt your ear, they communicate the sort of blurry urgency that the whole sequence is aiming for.

(Fwiw I just made up that example on the spot without thinking, so you'll forgive any stylistic or other grammar issues. It's the use of participles I'm wondering about for now.)

What do you have against sentences? What's with the fragment love? It's not urgent; it's irritating. Also, you're not using semicolons correctly, pretty much anyplace I've seen. Try Purdue OWL - there's probably a primer.
 

beckethm

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 3, 2013
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
466
Location
St. Paul
What about this one, to convey motion, urgency. (Let's say this is MC, and we're in a close-ish 3rd Person, meaning we're kinda narrating neutrally but kinda in his POV too):

Example 4

He burst through the front doors, pistol in hand. The concourse was bedlam; people in motion, the sounds of a stampede. Flashing lights, blaring alarms. Panicky parents with their crying kids, a group of teenagers dashing for the nearest exit. All around, sliding shoes slipping over glossy tiles. Nearby, three security guards running around in confused circles. Bedlam. The place was bedlam.

To my ear this sounds ok wrt the participles - they're kinda hidden in the middle of it all, they don't break the rhythm, they aren't glaringly grammatically wrong such that they hurt your ear, they communicate the sort of blurry urgency that the whole sequence is aiming for.

Fragments can be great for pacing, emphasis, and voice, but the example above is just too much, IMO. I'm okay with it up through "Flashing lights, blaring alarms" (though the semicolon in the second sentence really should be a period). After that, though, I don't see that the participle forms give you anything that simple past verbs wouldn't. I think it's sentence length, more than verb tense, that creates the sense of urgency you're going for. To me, this has just as much energy and is easier to read:
Panicked parents seized crying kids. A group of teenagers dashed for the nearest exit. All around, sliding shoes slipped over glossy tiles. Three security guards ran in confused circles. Bedlam. The place was bedlam.
My two cents.
 

Ken

Banned
Kind Benefactor
Joined
Dec 28, 2007
Messages
11,478
Reaction score
6,198
Location
AW. A very nice place!
That semicolon would be incorrect. The clauses on both sides of a semicolon must be independent. Neither can be a fragment.

Technically, they're both fragments like you say. But when you insert what's missing or understood they're complete sentences:

People (were) wandering around; waiters (were) carrying trays of drinks.

So I'd personally still opt for a semicolon, with commas to signify the absent verbs.

People, wandering around; waiters, carrying trays of drinks.

Just my own perspective.
 
Last edited:

Nymtoc

Benefactor Member
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
43,833
Reaction score
3,366
Location
Between the lines
All three are grammatically incorrect, and all three are acceptable in fiction, except for the semicolon in #3. No punctuation required in that spot.

Yes, you can do things like that in fiction, but as others have said, the technique gets old fast. It works best (when it works) in high-tension scenes, where you want to indicate rapid movement or frantic emotions. Some successful writers do that sort of thing a lot, especially in suspense fiction. It pulls some readers along and annoys others. :cool:
 

BethS

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
11,708
Reaction score
1,763
Hi all,

I want to ask if sentences like the 3 examples below are grammatical/acceptable usage. The point at issue is sentences with no verb other than a present participle.

This one--


The place was crowded with people; rushing about in a panic, running to catch trains, standing on the platform

--needs a colon after people, not a semi-colon.

The second one would work better with commas instead of periods.

The first one would be smoother like this:

I entered the room. It was big and bright, with people wandering around and waiters carrying trays of drinks.
 
Last edited: