Introducing English Linguistics

participles. When these two participles occur in a clause without an accom-
panying finite verb, the clause will always be subordinate. To illustrate how
subordination works, consider the example below, which contains two claus-
es: a subordinate clause (enclosed in brackets) followed by a main clause:
[Thinking
he was taking a call from the FBI liaison man in London to
announce Simon Cormack’s release,] Michael Odell did not mind the
hour: 5 a.m. in Washington. 
(BNC CAM 1828)
As the term ‘subordinate’ suggests, a subordinate clause is always part of
a main clause. In the example above, the opening clause (repeated as [a]
below), which contains the non-finite participle thinking, is subordinate to
the main clause ([b] below), which is marked by the finite auxiliary did,
which is in the past tense:
(a) Thinking he was taking a call from the FBI liaison man in London to
announce Simon Cormack’s release ...
(b) ... Michael Odell did not mind the hour: 5 a.m. in Washington.
Theoreticians will differ over whether the subordinate clause is part of
the main clause or separate from it. But the important point is that a sub-
ordinate clause is always associated with a main clause.
Clauses containing -ing participles are one of three types of non-finite
verbs that Quirk et al. (1985: 150–1) identify as occurring in subordinate
clauses. A second type contains a non-finite -ed participle. In the two exam-
ples below, the irregular -ed participles driven and taken head the subordi-
nate clauses enclosed in brackets:
[Driven
by disappointment in the present, concern for the future and
nostalgia for the past,] feelings of nationalism flowed out again into old
moulds. 
(ICE-GB W2B-007–086)
So I have a Spanish um, English bilingual sample, [taken from a class
actually of self identifying U-S Latinos.]
(MICASE STP355MG011)
In the two following examples, a third type of non-finite clause, called a