Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. Anonymous
    Guest
    #1

    negative + non-restrictive clause

    Are these sentences correct:
    1-"He was not a journalist, working for the NY Times."
    2-"He was not a journalist, who worked for the NY Times."

    Could they be followed by:
    A-"He was a photographer for the NY Times."

    Or do they necessarily mean that he was neither a journalist, nor an employee of the NY Times.

  2. Anonymous
    Guest
    #2

    Re: negative + non-restrictive clause

    Quote Originally Posted by ntasan
    Are these sentences correct:
    1-"He was not a journalist, working for the NY Times."
    2-"He was not a journalist, who worked for the NY Times."

    Could they be followed by:
    A-"He was a photographer for the NY Times."

    Or do they necessarily mean that he was neither a journalist, nor an employee of the NY Times.
    I would change the sentences. They sound a little rough to me.

    1. He was not working for the NY times as a journalist.
    2. He did not work for the NY times as a journalist.

    Sentence number two can be followed by: (2) He was a photographer for the NY times.

    Sentence number 1 can be followed by: (1) He was working as a photographer for the NY times.

    Keep the 2 simple past sentences together and keep the 2 past progressive sentences together. I would use the sentences in the simple past. They sound better.

    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Japan

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 45,571
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #3
    Take the commas out and they will start making sense.

  3. MikeNewYork's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Academic
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 18,563
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #4

    ntasan

    I agree with TDOL. The sentences are fine without the commas. Either of them could be followed by your third sentence.

    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Academic
      • Native Language:
      • Armenian
      • Home Country:
      • Iran
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 2,049
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #5
    Thanks. I'm beginning to get the picture, I think, but I'd like to try another one if you don't mind. What about this one:
    1-He wasn't a journalist, working for the NY Times, but a photographer, working for the LA Times.

    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Japan

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 45,571
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #6
    1-He wasn't a journalist, working for the NY Times, but a photographer, working for the LA Times.

    I'd say that here the commas are optional, depending on important you see the newspapers as.

  4. MikeNewYork's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Academic
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 18,563
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #7

    commas

    Quote Originally Posted by navi tasan
    Thanks. I'm beginning to get the picture, I think, but I'd like to try another one if you don't mind. What about this one:
    1-He wasn't a journalist, working for the NY Times, but a photographer, working for the LA Times.
    In many cases, commas are needed between a noun and a referent participial phrase. In this case, however, I'd prefer no commas because:

    1. The sentences are short.
    2. The particpial phrases are an integral part of the sentences meaning.


    • Join Date: May 2008
    • Posts: 1,159
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #8

    Re: negative + non-restrictive clause

    Quote Originally Posted by Tdol View Post
    1-He wasn't a journalist, working for the NY Times, but a photographer, working for the LA Times.

    I'd say that here the commas are optional, depending on important you see the newspapers as.

    Aren't the first and third commas unnecessary? I agree with MikeNewYork.


    • Join Date: Jul 2006
    • Posts: 2,890
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #9

    Re: negative + non-restrictive clause

    Quote Originally Posted by Daruma View Post
    Aren't the first and third commas unnecessary? I agree with MikeNewYork.
    IMO, they are. The -ing clauses are participles that describe, complement the predicate nominatives.

Similar Threads

  1. We can reduce adverb clauses to adverb phrases. Why?
    By Steven D in forum General Language Discussions
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 23-Sep-2004, 14:42
  2. relative clause
    By hela in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-Jun-2004, 00:15
  3. Relative clause
    By Anonymous in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-Apr-2004, 15:35
  4. "which" as the head of a restrictive clause
    By Casiopea in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 13-Oct-2003, 18:00

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •