English Courses
CoursesLibrary
CoursesLibrary
English Courses

Step by step to excellent English.

Learn

CoursesLibrary

App

iOSAndroid

More

PrivacyTermsContact
© 2026 English Courses
Library›Relative Clauses
Reading font
Text size100%
A
A
Typeface

Reduced Relative Clauses

A reduced relative clause is a shorter form of a full relative clause. Instead of who is, which was, or that are followed by a verb, the clause keeps only the participle or adjective — directly after the noun it describes.

Full: The woman who is waiting outside is my colleague.
Reduced: The woman waiting outside is my colleague.

The meaning stays the same. The sentence becomes tighter and more natural, especially in written English and formal speech.

How reduction works

A full relative clause typically contains three parts: a relative pronoun (who, which, that), a form of be (is, was, are, were), and a participle or adjective. Reduction removes the pronoun and the auxiliary, leaving the participle directly attached to the noun.

the report that was published last week → the report published last week
students who are preparing for exams → students preparing for exams

This works because the participle alone already tells the reader whether the action is active or passive. An -ing form signals that the noun is doing the action. A past participle signals that the noun is receiving it.

Active reduction: present participle

When the full relative clause describes an active, ongoing, or habitual action, the reduced form uses the -ing participle.

The man standing at the entrance is the security guard.
(Full: The man who is standing at the entrance...)
Passengers travelling with children may board early.
(Full: Passengers who are travelling with children...)
The road connecting the two villages was closed after the storm.
(Full: The road that connects the two villages...)

The last example shows an important point: the full clause does not have to be in a continuous tense. The road that connects is present simple, yet it reduces naturally to the road connecting. What matters is that the subject of the clause is the one performing the action.

Negation

To negate a reduced active clause, place not before the participle.

Employees not wearing safety gear will be asked to leave the site.
(Full: Employees who are not wearing safety gear...)

Passive reduction: past participle

When the full clause is passive — the noun is receiving the action — the reduced form uses the past participle (the third form of the verb: written, built, designed, taken).

The email sent by the manager contained new instructions.
(Full: The email that was sent by the manager...)
The bridge built in the 1930s is still in use today.
(Full: The bridge which was built in the 1930s...)
Food imported from abroad must pass quality checks.
(Full: Food that is imported from abroad...)

Continuous passive: *being* + past participle

If the full clause uses a continuous passive (is being built, was being repaired), the reduced form keeps being.

The building being constructed on Park Avenue will be a hotel.
(Full: The building that is being constructed on Park Avenue...)
The software being tested by the team should launch in March.

This form appears mostly in formal or technical writing.

Reduction to an adjective

Sometimes the full relative clause contains only who/which/that + a form of be + an adjective. In this case, the adjective moves directly after the noun — no participle needed.

The people present at the meeting agreed to the proposal.
(Full: The people who were present at the meeting...)
Please contact any staff member available this afternoon.
(Full: ...any staff member who is available this afternoon.)
The only tickets remaining are in the back row.

Not every adjective works in this position. It is most natural with adjectives like present, available, responsible, remaining, involved, concerned, visible.

When reduction is possible

Three conditions must be met for a relative clause to reduce cleanly.

1. The relative pronoun must be the subject of the clause.

If the pronoun is the object, reduction to a participle is not possible.

The woman who(m) I met at the conference... — cannot be reduced with a participle, because who is the object (you met her).

Compare with:

The woman who was sitting next to me... → The woman sitting next to me... — works, because who is the subject.

2. There must be a form of be to remove, or the verb must convert naturally to an -ing form.

Clauses with be + participle reduce most smoothly: just delete the pronoun and be.

Clauses in simple tenses without be can still reduce if the -ing form sounds natural:

a company that employs 500 people → a company employing 500 people

But not every verb converts smoothly. The man who lives next door can become the man living next door in most contexts, but it may feel less natural than the full form in casual speech.

3. The reduced form must remain unambiguous.

If removing the relative pronoun creates confusion about which noun the participle modifies, keep the full clause.

I saw the CEO's assistant who was carrying the documents. — Clear: the assistant was carrying them.
I saw the CEO's assistant carrying the documents. — Still clear in most contexts, but if two people are present and the reader might misattach carrying to the wrong noun, the full form is safer.

Defining vs. non-defining

Both defining and non-defining relative clauses can be reduced. Non-defining clauses keep their commas.

Defining: The candidates selected for the interview will be notified by Friday.
Non-defining: Dr. Patel, trained in London, now works at a hospital in Tokyo.
(Full: Dr. Patel, who was trained in London, ...)
Non-defining: The report, written entirely in French, was difficult for the team to read.

Prepositional phrases as reduction

A special case of reduction: when the full clause contains only who/which/that + be + a prepositional phrase, removing the pronoun and be leaves just the phrase.

The keys on the table belong to James.
(Full: The keys that are on the table...)
The woman in the red coat is my supervisor.
(Full: The woman who is in the red coat...)

This is so common in everyday English that most speakers do not even think of it as a reduced clause — but structurally, it follows the same logic.

Common mistakes

Reducing object clauses

the book I borrowed yesterday
this is already correct as pronoun omission, not a participle reduction; do not change it to the book borrowing yesterday
the colleague who I called last night
cannot become the colleague calling last night (the meaning would reverse: now the colleague is doing the calling)

Forgetting being in continuous passives

The house renovated right now looks terrible
The house being renovated right now looks terrible
The road repaired at the moment is closed
The road being repaired at the moment is closed

Wrong participle form

The email writing by the manager
The email written by the manager
The report completing last week
The report completed last week

Dangling participle (attaching to the wrong noun)

Built in 1920, the architect won an award for the house
Built in 1920, the house won the architect an award
Written in French, the team could not understand the contract
Written in French, the contract was difficult for the team to understand

On this page

  • How reduction works
  • Active reduction: present participle
  • Negation
  • Passive reduction: past participle
  • Continuous passive: *being* + past participle
  • Reduction to an adjective
  • When reduction is possible
  • Defining vs. non-defining
  • Prepositional phrases as reduction
  • Common mistakes
← PreviousWhere, When, and Why

More in this topic

B1Defining Relative Clauses

The woman who called

B1_B2Non-Defining Relative Clauses

My sister, who lives in Paris, ...

B1_B2That vs Which

When to use each relative pronoun