Review of the linguistic literature on the problems of Phrase Theory in Modern Linguistics

Ending Participial Phrase:
These are often set off by commas to emphasize, especially if they are not directly after the nouns that often occurs. There are no commas if the information is necessary to identify or if emphasis is not needed.
I saw the monkey swinging from the trees. K. Macleod’s “The Wrock and Rune”
“Swinging from the trees” follows the noun (“monkey”) that it describes, and no special emphasis seems needed so no commas are necessary.
Huong followed the crowd, fearing being left behind.
In this case, “fearing being left behind” describes “Huong” not “the crowd”, so the comma is necessary to separate “crowd” from the phrase. This pause helps the reader to understand the meaning.
Note: it’s always better for clarity to put the participial phrase right next to the noun it describes, but it is sometimes awkward to construct such a sentence when the phrase occurs at the end of the sentence.
The monkey threw food at the teenagers, provoked by their actions.
A comma follows “teenagers” to separate it from the participial phrase and help to make clear that the “monkey” is the one provoked.
Note: the pronoun “their” also helps to make the meaning clear.
Maribel cleaned up the milk spilled on the desk.
There is no comma because “spilled on the desk” describes which milk (not the milk on the floor, for example) and is identifying.
John hit the man waving a gun. K. Macleod’s “The Wrock and Rune”
No commas are used here because the man has the gun. This information is identifying.
Note: a comma could mean either that the information is not identifying or that John has the gun. In that case, the participial phrase would be ambiguous or confusing.
Dangling modifiers.
There are instances when the participial phrase seems to make sense although the participial phrase does not specifically name an action that the subject of the sentence is performing. This is called a dangling modifier. This is called a dangling modifiers occur most frequently when the participial phrase is at the beginning of the sentence.
In correct: Helping himself to the buffet, the things that Todd quietly thought about food were never to be discussed with anyone.
Here the partical phrase. Helping himself to the buffet is not something that the things (the subject of the sentence) is doing.
Correct: Helping himself to the buffet, Todd quietly thought things about food that were never to be dicussed with anyone.
Incorrect: Carried on the shoulders of all the player’ wives, his foot dangled precariously for all his fans to grab. K. Macleod’s “The Wrock and Rune”
Correct: Carried on the shoulders of all the player’s wives, John Dingle dangled his foot precaiously for all his fans to grab.
The participial phrase at the end of the sentence can also be considered a dangling modifier if it does not refer back to the subject of the sentence.
Incorrect: A large twig floated over jabbed him, swimming against the tide.
Here swimming against the tide is not something that the twig is doing. Twigs don’t swim. They float. However, it appears as if swimming against the tide is modifying him ( the final pronoun in the main clause). While some grammarians might not find anything objectionable about this practice, generally speaking, participial; phrases ( both at the end of and in front of the main clauses) should refer back to the subject.
Correct: Ricky wrigley was jabbed by a floating twig, swimming against the tide.
Better: Ricky Wrigley, swimming against the tide, was jabbed by a floating twig. K. Macleod’s “The Wrock and Rune”
It is best if the modifying phrase is placed as possible as to the noun it is modifying. For this reason, the phrase is moved up here next to Ricky Wriglley.
Also, this suggests that the participal phrase should be included after the main clause only if absolutely necessary.
[Notice here that swimming against the tide could also be seen as a reduced relative clause as well].
Ricky Wrigley, who was swimming against the tide, was jabbed by a floating twig. [With the reduced relative pronoun is ommited.]
When a participial phrase is attached to the end of a sentence and it is modifying the last word of the sentence (a noun), it may be acting like a reduced relative clause as well. In this case, refer to the rules for restrictive and non- restrictive clauses for punctuation.
Example: Harold invented his own god, laughing maniacally at the sight of a face in a cloud. K. Macleod’s “The Wrock and Rune”

The question here is who is laughing maniacally. Punctuated as it is now, laughing maniacally at the sight of a face in a cloud is a participial phrase that modifies Harold. However, it could be seen as a reduced relative clause that is modifying god. This relative clause is restrictive because laughing maniacally would specify what kind of god Harold had invented. Therefore, use no comma.

Harold invented his own god which was laughing maniacally at the sight of a face in a cloud.
Harold invented his own god laughing maniacally at the sight of a face in a cloud. K. Macleod’s “The Wrock and Rune”
Using the participial phrase.
The participial phrase is just another way to write sentences with compound verbs in them. It provides a variety of sentence style.¹
Compound verb: Cecil carries the corn to the tomb of his Incon mother and then shunks it.
Participial phrase: Carrying the corn to the tomb of his Incan mother, Cecil then shunks it. K. Macleod’s “The Wrock and Rune”
Compound verb: He dragged the basket out of the fire, litted the Pekinoese by the scruff of its neck and kissed it full on its tiny, pink lips.
Participial phrase: Dragging the basket out of the scruff of its neck and kissed it full on its tiny, pink lips.
Participial phrase (compound): Dragging the basket out of the fire and litting the Pekingese by the scruff of its neck, he kissed it full on its tiny, pink lips. K. Macleod’s “The Wrock and Rune”
[Note: The action that occurs in the main clause is the one said to be emphasized. The participial phrase is said to be subordinated to the main clause].