производящая эти приборы (present active participle)

I have been studying active participles these few days.

I met this example in my grammar reference book, it demonstrates the interchange between active participles and subordinate clauses of который.

i. Компания, производящ ая эти приборы, появилась на рынке два года назад. ii. Компания, котор ая производит эти приборы, появилась на рынке два года назад.

The grammar book explains that the present active participle "denotes an action which is simultaneous with the action or state denoted by the main verb".

Then I wonder why sentence ii. is not котор ая производи ла , since the main verb "появилась" is in past tense.

But then if the company now produces (present tense) the equipment, and it appeared 2 years ago (past tense). What participle should I put here?

Компания, _____________ эти приборы, появилась на рынке два года назад.

gvozd Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

gvozd Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

But then if the company now produces (present tense) the equipment, and it appeared 2 years ago (past tense). What participle should I put here?

Компания, _____________ эти приборы, появилась на рынке два года назад.

Maroseika Moderator

29 Дек 2011

This is just wrong. Present active participle can 'combine' with the main verb in any tense (better say not main verb, but a verb in the main clause, the clause with a participle being subordinate): Компания, производящая (которая производит) приборы, скоро разорится (работает успешно, появилась два года назад). So you can easily change present active participle to the verb with который without any influence on the main clause.

And just the same for past active participles: Компания, производившая (которая производила) приборы, скоро разорится (работает успешно, появилась два года назад).

wonlon Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

I have another book which also mentions that: (translation from Chinese)(* indicates my remarks)

Use of present active participle (below shortened PAP):

1. Simultaneous meaning: PAP indicates an action which is simultaneous with the action or state denoted by the main verb. e.g. 1. На дворе шумят дети, играющие в минифутбол. e.g. 2. Вокруг Землёй будет лететь новый спутник, держащий радиосвязь с центром.

If the PAP phrase is to be transformed into subordinate clause of который, the tense of the transformed verb should be determined by the PAP's meaning. (*this is vague, but I think it means = tense of main verb)

Therefore, e.g. 1. На дворе шумят дети, которые играют в минифутбол. e.g. 2. Вокруг Землёй будет лететь новый спутник, который будет держать радиосвязь с центром.

2. Universal time meaning: the action does not have specific time boundaries. e.g. Самые опытные и самые талантный - это народные массы, принимающие участие в производстеенной практике. e..g. Народ и только народ является движущей силой, творящей мировую историю.

gvozd Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

wonlon Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

I have been studying active participles these few days.

. "denotes an action which is simultaneous with the action or state denoted by the main verb"

wonlon Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

e.g. 2. Вокруг Земли будет лететь новый спутник, держащий радиосвязь с центром. e.g. 2. Вокруг Землёй будет лететь новый спутник, который будет держать радиосвязь с центром.

The book actually writes the first Земли, and the second Землёй. But may it be correct to use the determinate motion verb лететь?

wonlon Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

wonlon Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

It is a topical wording.

Here it means if будет лететь is future tense, держащий is also future tense. So the tense of the PAP depends on the main verb (or "verb in the main clause").

But if you say держащий is present tense, this seems not to make sense, since the satellite is still not launched (as it says it will fly).

gvozd Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

wonlon Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

Explorer41 Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

gvozd Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

Explorer41 Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

(I cite the wording: "компания, которая производила эти товары, появилась на рынке два года назад")

gvozd, it seems to me that this doesn't mean the company doesn't produce these goods anymore. Nothing is said about the present state of the things. But of course, the silence may mean something! And may not mean.

PS: of course, I'm not a linguist, too. I just try to use some logic . We all are learning here!

EDIT: by the way, the phrase "Самые опытные и самые талантный - это народные массы. " is wrong -- there is no such word "талантный", and even if it existed, it would be "талантные" here.

gvozd Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

wonlon Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

Take the reverse angle, what participle would you put here to keep the same meaning?

Вокруг Земл и будет лететь новый спутник, который будет держать радиосвязь с центром. Вокруг Земл и будет лететь новый спутник, ______________ радиосвязь с центром.

Explorer41 Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

But if I wished to keep the meaning in a most precise manner, then I wouldn't use the participle at all.

And the right verb here is "летать". "летать" is a continuos, repeatable action (something like a "property verb"), whereas "лететь" is not -- it is just a state of things.

gvozd Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

Take the reverse angle, what participle would you put here to keep the same meaning?

wonlon Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

1. But what if I make a sentence, what do you put on the line to keep the same meaning?

Компания, производящ ая эти приборы, появится (future tense) на рынке через два года (after 2 years). Компания, которая _____________ эти приборы, появится на рынке через два года.

2. Take the reverse angle, what participle do you put here to keep the same meaning?

Компания, которая будет производить эти приборы, появится на рынке через два года. Компания, ____________ эти приборы, появится на рынке через два года.

Explorer41 Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

1. But what if I make a sentence, what do you put on the line to keep the same meaning?

2. Take the reverse angle, what participle do you put here to keep the same meaning?

1. You can always substitute "производящая" with "которая производит". It is always true for every sentence (with other verbs too). Well, maybe I mixed some exceptions, but. And similarly you can always substitute "производившая" with "которая производила".

2. In this particular case I wouldn't use any participle. There are no active participles in the future tense. Sometimes you can use a participle in the present tense to substitute a verb in the future tense, but not always.

Maroseika Moderator

29 Дек 2011

1. But what if I make a sentence, what do you put on the line to keep the same meaning?

Которая производит. But it's rather weird semanically, because how can it produce anything if it is only going to appear in the future? But you can say: Компания, которая может (but better сможет) производить эти приборы, появится через два года.

2. Take the reverse angle, what participle do you put here to keep the same meaning?

No participle. Just because there is no Future Participle in Russian.

Wonlon, I think you should just grasp one thing: In Russian there is no sequence of tenses like in English, the main and subordinate clauses each talk about separate events which can coincide in time with each other, or can not coincide. Of course, when you use a participle instead of который + verb, it is not a subordinate clause, but the point is quite the same - tenses of a participle and of a main verb have nothing to do with each other, they each live their own life.

wonlon Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

But see this: A Comprehensive Russian Grammar, Terence Wade [Third Edition]: (i) The present active participle denotes an action which is simultaneous with the action or state denoted by the main verb:

Выставки, рассказывающие о предупреждении несчастных случаев, всегда вызывают большой интерес. Exhibitions which describe accident prevention always arouse great interest.

Note The main verb may denote present or past action: Я видел/вижу собаку, бегущую по берегу. ‘I saw/see a dog running along the shore’.

If the book is correct, then бегущий may be in present tense or past tense, depending on the tense of увидеть. What do you think?

I really hope that I can go for the simple, not to over-think and just take PAP as always present tense. But things seem not that simple. The book, though gets people (me) into trouble, writes things with a reason, right?

Explorer41 Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

Я видел/вижу собаку, бегущую по берегу. ‘I saw/see a dog running along the shore’.

If the book is correct, then бегущий may be in present tense or past tense, depending on the tense of увидеть. What do you think?

The tense of "бегущая" is of course present -- it is a grammatical property of the word "бегущая". As for meaning. Yes, the book is right. OK. By the way, you can as well say "я видел собаку, бежавшую по берегу", and it will mean roughly the same.

See this: "собака, бегущая по берегу, была щенком два года назад". Here the actions are not simultaneous, though the correlation between tenses is the same. I wonder what is the difference. What I see is that in my latter example the subjects of both actions are the same. Probably that's why the meaning changed, and actions are not simultaneous anymore.

Maroseika Moderator

29 Дек 2011

No, this is wrong. It can be not simultaneous as well.

Выставки, рассказывающие о предупреждении несчастных случаев, всегда вызывали (будут вызывать) большой интерес.

Note The main verb may denote present or past action: Я видел/вижу собаку, бегущую по берегу. ‘I saw/see a dog running along the shore’.

If the book is correct, then бегущий may be in present tense or past tense, depending on the tense of увидеть. What do you think?

No, бегущий can be in present or past tense depending on what you want to say and independing on the tense of увидеть.

Я увидел собаку, бегущую по берегу. Я увидел собаку, бежавшую по берегу.

These two sentences mean almost the same, but the second one is as if you are telling from today about the past. And the first sentence is like you are telling it from the past. Is it clear?

И тут я вижу собаку, бегущую по берегу. This is also the same, but even more from the past, as if you are right there, in the past, right now.

Я вижу собаку, бегущую по берегу. Generally, in common case, this is being said now, about the present.

Syline Senior Member

29 Дек 2011

1. But what if I make a sentence, what do you put on the line to keep the same meaning?

2. Take the reverse angle, what participle do you put here to keep the same meaning?

1) Компания, которая будет производить эти приборы, появится на рынке через два года. 2) Компания, производящая эти приборы, появится на рынке через два года. (I'm not yet convinced that the present participle will be grammatically incorrect here, I need to see a strict rule.)

The tense of the participle can be simultaneous either with the action in the main clause or with the moment of speech.

📎📎📎📎📎📎📎📎📎📎