[mesmark]

"Trying to take a closer look at her, the police officer told us to stay back."

One of my students asked me about this sentence, and at first all I could do was say it didn't seem natural. I reasoned that the omitted subject in the first clause, wasn't the subject in the main sentence, but it was interesting that it was there as an object.

Then I thought about it and changed the sentence to:
"Trying to take a closer look at her, the police officer told us (that) we had to stay back."

So, adding the subject of the first clause in the subordinate clause makes it acceptable. Is that the rule? That the subject that's omitted must be attested as a subject somewhere within the sentence?

- confused