identifying with the company

Status
Not open for further replies.

keannu

VIP Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Korean
Home Country
South Korea
Current Location
South Korea
1.Does "identifying with the company and often moving" describe "You" or "a company man"? I think it's "a company man".
2.If so, Is "who was" omitted in "a company man,(who was) identifying with..."?
3.If it is a non-defining phrase, "a company man" should be identified without "identifying with.." phrase, but "a company man" doesn't seem to be identified without the following phrase. But does it all depend on your thinking?

go3mo-42
ex)Companies once provided not only economic security but social identity. Many towns were literally company towns, with
a few big corporations providing most of the employment, and the social and economic infrastructure built around them. You
were a company man, identifying with the company and often moving largely in the circles created or dictated by it.
However, people don’t stay tied to companies anymore.
 

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
1.Does "identifying with the company and often moving" describe "You" or "a company man"? I think it's "a company man".
If you were the company man, then they refer to the same person, don't they?

2.If so, Is "who was" omitted in "a company man,(who was) identifying with..."?
No, but it means the same thing. It's not actually omitted, but you could insert if you like.

3.If it is a non-defining phrase, "a company man" should be identified without "identifying with.." phrase, but "a company man" doesn't seem to be identified without the following phrase. But does it all depend on your thinking?
No, the meaning doesn't depend on your thinking. You, a company man, identified with the company ... [used to identify with the company] ...

go3mo-42
ex)Companies once provided not only economic security but social identity. Many towns were literally company towns, with
a few big corporations providing most of the employment, and the social and economic infrastructure built around them. You
were a company man, identifying with the company and often moving largely in the circles created or dictated by it.
However, people don’t stay tied to companies anymore.
This is all pretty straightforward, keanu. There are no tricks in this sentence.
It means that, if you worked for the company, you were a company man and, as such, you identified with ...
 

keannu

VIP Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Korean
Home Country
South Korea
Current Location
South Korea
I was confused with non-defining phrases like "He is Obama, (who is) acknowledged as a great leader", but the above example seems a participle clause like "He came home, running so fast". But in this composition, it usually has a main verb and then a participle phrase, so the above example had both characteristics. What do you think?
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
He came home, running so fast.
He was at home, sleeping peacefully.
You were a company man, identifying with the company and often moving largely in the circles created or dictated by it
.

I don't really see a difference between these, keannu. Do you?
 

keannu

VIP Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Korean
Home Country
South Korea
Current Location
South Korea
Thanks a lot, Sorry I missed the similarity of the second sentence. Yes, the third one is exactly same as the second one without any problem.One last question, what is the difference between 1 and 2? In 1, does "identifying" describe "you", while in 2, "a company man"? I don't really know when to use a comma and when not to. That's why I took 1 for a non-defining clause.

1.You were a company man, identifying with the company
2.You were a company man identifying with the company
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
As Raymott has already pointed out, you were the company man, and so it comes to the same thing.

We can loosely paraphrase #1 as 'You were a company man and, as such, you identified with the company', and #2 as 'You were a company man who identified with the company (as opposed to a company man who did not identify with the company)'. #2 is, I feel, quite unlikely.
 

keannu

VIP Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Korean
Home Country
South Korea
Current Location
South Korea
Okay, I finally got the meaning, and for a related question, I'd like to know the answer. It's related to non-defining clause.
If you think president Obama can be identified without any defining clause, do you insert a comma? And for an unknown Obama, no comma? Does it all depend on your subjective judgement not objective one?
I'm asking this as I seem to have seen unspecific unidentifiable nouns like "a man, who" which has a comma.

ex)I met president Obama, who is a great leader, and then met another Obama who is my neighbor.
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
1. I met [STRIKE]p[/STRIKE] President Obama, who is a great leader, and then met another Obama, who is my neighbor.
2 The Obama who is my neighbor is very friendly.

In #, both relatives clauses are simply adding extra information, and commas are necessary.
In #2, the relative clause is defining the Obama, and we use no comma.
 

keannu

VIP Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Korean
Home Country
South Korea
Current Location
South Korea
If the writer thinks people can't recognize who "another Obama" is, I mean, if the writer thinks "who is my neighbor" is essential information to recognize "another Obama", wouldn't he remove the comma? I was interested in the border between extra information and essential information.

ex) ...then met another Obama, who is my neighbor.
 

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
If the writer thinks people can't recognize who "another Obama" is, I mean, if the writer thinks "who is my neighbor" is essential information to recognize "another Obama", wouldn't he remove the comma? I was interested in the border between extra information and essential information.

ex) ...then met another Obama, who is my neighbor.
"ex)I met president
Obama, who
is a great leader, and then met another
Obama who
is my neighbor."
You need a comma here if you're ever likely to need a bizarre sentence like this. Without a comma it means there are are two or more Obamas who are your neighbours and one of them is the president. You met President Obama, then you met another Obama neighbour.

Quote: "I'm asking this as I seem to have seen unspecific unidentifiable nouns like "a man, who" which has a comma."
You'll see lots of things, not all of which are right.

PS: I'm leaving the quotes the way this editor seems to want them. I'm tired of fighting with the thing.
 

keannu

VIP Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Korean
Home Country
South Korea
Current Location
South Korea
I'm really sorry to have bothered you. Now I fully understand your explanation. Thanks a lot! My confusion comes from the Korean structure where restricting or defining clause or phrase should come before a noun, which is quite the opposite of that of English. If you had to learn Korean, you would have the same problem. Anyway, thanks a million!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top