1. '...pictures and videos of
you guys partying like animals.'
The pictures and videos
show you guys
doing something (i.e. 'partying like animals'). 'partying like animals' describes 'you guys'.
2. '...
pictures and videos of you guys
that are partying like animals.'
Sentence 2. is strange (i.e. unnatural). It means, the pictures and videos are partying like animals.
3. '...
pictures and videos of you
that were partying like animals".
Aside from past tense 'were', sentence 3. holds the same meaning as 2.: the pictures and videos are partying. Strange, wouldn't you agree?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jeab 5. And if I use guys instead of you guys, doesn't it change the meaning of the sentence?? |
Yes.
A. ...videos of
guys that~who were partying :D
B. ...pictures and videos of
you guys that were partying :(
Sentence A is correct, whereas sentence B is odd. The reason being, the phrase 'you guys' is headed by a pronoun.
Noun + who: Pictures of
John who was partying... (OK)
Pronoun + who: Pictures of
him who was partying... (Not OK)
In short, 'that were partying' can't modify 'you guys', so it modifies the only noun phrase in the sentence 'pictures and videos, resulting in a strange, unnatural meaning.