Problem sentence that starts with participle phrase

Hi all,

The context is that a guy has just walked into a room and is looking around.

Sentence 1: Leaning against the far wall he saw a yellow sign.

Sentence 2: Leaning against the far wall, he saw a yellow sign.

I believe Sentence 2 means it's the man leaning against the wall, whereas in Sentence 1 it's the sign leaning against the wall (which is the meaning I want).

My understanding of the rule here is that present participle phrases at the start of a sentence require a comma to separate them from main clause of the sentence, and the effect of that comma is to connect the PPP (as a modifier) to the nearest noun/pronoun (in sentence 2, the man/he).

But without the comma I believe the sentence sort of runs straight through and the PPP can (?) or definitively does (?) refer to the sign.

I have been unable to find a definitive answer at OWL. They mention what happens to PPP's with the comma, but not what happens without the comma.

So that's issue 1.

A secondary concern, on top of proper grammar, is whether the reader needs a double-take to get meaning even with the grammatically correct one. If meaning is unclear, then it's kinda moot that it's grammatically correct.

.............

Fwiw, you might say why not go with:

Sentence 3: He saw a yellow sign leaning against the far wall......OR.....There was a yellow sign leaning against the far wall.

Problem here is one of emphasis (to my ear anyway) - the focus of these sentences is more on the wall rather than the sign or the seeing. It just feels slightly wrong in the context of surrounding sentences, because the next sentence describes the sign (it's a thrilling read!!) and I need the emphasis to be on it in this preceding sentence.

King Neptune said:

So he walked into a room and saw what was on the right on the left and on the far side of the room? If that is more or less how you set it up, then I think you could just recount what he saw.
Leaning against the far wall, there was a yellow sign.
OR
There was a yellow sign leaning against the far wall.
I assume that the yellowness is important.

Click to expand...

Hi KN,

Actually, no, the character hadn't looked around the room yet, which is why I needed the "saw" verb in the problem sentence. But now that you mention it, your solution is more elegant - I'll add a "He looked around" to establish the seeing/looking bit before, and we'll then be in his clear POV when the sign is mentioned. Thanks.

(@ Maryn: Thanks, you make a similar point as KN, and I think you're both spot on.)

Can I clarify why we need the comma in your first sentence? Is it because the PPP is acting as an introductory phrase of 5+ words? Would you have a comma in this version of 4 words: "Leaning against the wall there was a yellow sign."?

...........

On your second suggested sentence, I thought about that one as per OP, but felt the emphasis was wrong, with too much weight on the wall, not enough sign.

..........

The sign is yellow because it's one of those you see in public spaces that warn about slippery floors. I think once you say the sign is yellow, readers know exactly what kind of sign you mean. The character uses it to block a door subsequently. I also have some metaphysical, symbolic mumbo-jumbo about the little stick man on the sign - slipping over, motion stripes under his feet, flailing arms - somehow foreshadowing the fate of my character. But I try to keep matters of overreaching pretension and hopeless overwriting between me, my MS and my maker.

Thanks everyone for input.

My key mistake here I think was having the "saw" verb as part of the problem sentence. Once that is removed - and made into a separate action in previous sentence - you're only left with the wall, the sign and a single active verb, and the sentence repairs itself.

Cathy C said:

A point of clarification on this part. Readers won't have a clue that the sign is a slippery floor type simply because it's yellow. There are any number of yellow signs out in shops and stores. Also, "leaning against the wall" gives the impression it's larger and the type of sign that normally hangs on the wall, as opposed to a floor stand that opens like a tripod.

Which are you intending it to be?

Click to expand...

Yes, point taken, but I think in context below it's clear enough.

We've already established he's in a shopping centre. He's now making his way towards the public toilets, where he's about to do something wicked. Here's the sequence:

The toilets were located at the far end of the first floor walkway, off a gloomy little alcove where nobody could be much bothered changing broken light bulbs or washing the floor.

He stepped into the alcove. It was quieter in here. He looked around. Leaning against the wall was a yellow sign, on it a little stick man with flailing arms, and motion stripes under his feet. CAUTION, the sign said.

He crossed the alcove and positioned himself behind a column in the far corner.

Click to expand...

I'm still playing with the words (I really dislike the "..., on it..." construction and am looking to fix that, and I also dislike the repetition of "into" & "in" in first two sentences of para 2) but on your point I think the little stick man + yellow colour clarify meaning.

Re: the need for the sign in the first place, he uses it in a moment to block a door, so we do need it. Plus, the little slipping man is meant to be a little joke about how he's getting himself into bother.

Thanks for engaging.

Bufty said:

Context always helps with this type of question, which has gone way beyond the initial issue of using a participial phrase to open a sentence..

We don't know the context unless we're told, and explaining after the event to justify what you had in the first place is pretty useless.

There's nothing here you couldn't have worked out by yourself.

Click to expand...

Whoa. I couldn't have worked out my problem sentence without help. That's why I posted. And I only answered the other posters' point about the context of the sign in lieu of not replying to her at all, which surely would have been rude.

I very much appreciate people's input.