The company makes demands on its employees.

[mrmvp]

The company makes demands on its employees to work outside working hours.

Can I say the company which is an object is making demands on its employees?

 

[Rover_KE]

The company makes demands on its employees to work outside working hours.

What is the source and context of that sentence?

Can I say ’The company which is an object is making demands on its employees‘?

No, that makes no sense. Please tell us what you want that to mean.

 

[stanislaw.masny]

Not a teacher

In my opinion, a company can demand hard work, creativity, collaboration, and results.

 

[emsr2d2]

Can I say the company which is an object is making demands on its employees?

Are you sure that you really want "which is an object" to be part of the sentence you want to write?

 

[SoothingDave]

I believe he is asking if he can personify a company as the subject of the sentence.

Yes. Yes, you can.

Legally a corporation is a fictitious person.

 

[mrmvp]

What is the source and context of that sentence?


No, that makes no sense. Please tell us what you want that to mean.

I wrote the sentence.

I mean the company requires or forces its employees to work outside of working hours.

 

[mrmvp]

Are you sure that you really want "which is an object" to be part of the sentence you want to write?

Why not ?
The company can require its employees to exert effort. Definitely, the company can not hire and issue orders by itself. The company is represented by the administration and staff.

I drink three bottles of water. I drink the water inside the bottle, not the bottles.

 

[mrmvp]

I believe he is asking if he can personify a company as the subject of the sentence.

Yes. Yes, you can.

Legally a corporation is a fictitious person.

Yes.

 

[emsr2d2]

Can I say the company which is an object is making demands on its employees?

Are you sure that you really want "which is an object" to be part of the sentence you want to write?

Why not?

Perhaps my question was unclear. I thought you were suggesting that you wanted to use the following sentence:
The company which is an object is making demands on its employees.

I think what you meant to ask was whether you could use the following sentence:
The company is making demands on its employees.

In post #1, you should have written "Can I say that a company (where "company" is an object) is making demands on its employees?"
You need to be careful when you use grammatical terms with a different meaning. I thought you meant that "company" is the object of the sentence (as opposed to the subject). I now see that you intended "object" to mean "thing".

 

[mrmvp]

Perhaps my question was unclear. I thought you were suggesting that you wanted to use the following sentence:
The company which is an object is making demands on its employees.

I think what you meant to ask was whether you could use the following sentence:
The company is making demands on its employees.

In post #1, you should have written "Can I say that a company (where "company" is an object) is making demands on its employees?"
You need to be careful when you use grammatical terms with a different meaning. I thought you meant that "company" is the object of the sentence (as opposed to the subject). I now see that you intended "object" to mean "thing".

Thank you, sir. I should have used a parenthesis to make my sentence more clear.

Could you please check if the following sentences are correct? are there any difference in meaning?

1-The company is making demands on its employees.

2-The company making demands on its employees.

3. The company makes demands on its employees.

 

[emsr2d2]

Thank you. sir. Don't refer to users here as "Sir" (or "Madam"). It's overly formal and suggests that you assume you know the sex of the person. You don't.

I should have used a parenthesis parentheses to make my sentence more clear.

Could you please check if the following sentences are correct? are Is there any difference in meaning?

1. The company is making demands on its employees.
2. The company making demands on its employees. This is not a complete sentence.
3. The company makes demands on its employees.

As you can see above, #2 is incorrect. The difference between #1 and #3 is that in the first, the use of the continuous expresses the ongoing nature of the demand, and in the second, the use of the present simple expresses a habitual fact/action.