The passive form of perfect participle "having been done" indicates that the time of the action that it refers to is before that of the verb in the main clause, and also there is passive meaning. So does the past participle "done".
So I am wondering whether there is any differences between them. Are they exchangeable?
Here are some examples:
1a) Having been told many times, he finally understood it.
1b) Told many times, he finally understood it.
2a) Ideally having been located for Broadway theatre and Fifth Avenue, the New York Park hotel is a favorite with many guests.
2b) Ideally located for Broadway theatre and Fifth Avenue, the New York Park hotel is a favorite with many guests.
3a) The Town Hall having been completed in the 1800’s was the most distinguished building at that time.
3b) The Town Hall completed in the 1800’s was the most distinguished building at that time.
In my opinion, we would use passive perfect participle "having been done" instead of past participle "done", if we want to emphasize an earlier time. Therefore in the above examples, 1a, 2b, and 3b are appropriate. Am I right?
Best Answer
This could be just my bias, but it seems to me that the more roundabout passive version is more particular than the simple past participle version, referring to a specific circumstance or incident. Although both versions can be understood either as a statement of general truth or as a statement of a specific truth, it's as though the passive version is preceded, by default, with "On that occasion" and the simple past participle is not preceded by a default, but with "Whenever|On that occasion" and needs additional context.
Having been given an order, he obeyed.
Given an order, he obeyed.
Having been shown how to do the task, he completed it.
Shown how to do the task, he completed it.