London ,which is located on....

[sky3120]

"London, which is located on the River Thames, is the capital of England."

"London, located on the River Thames, is the capital of England."

I know that both are okay and the same and "located on..." is a reduced non defining relative

pronoun. And I think we also could call "located on..." is a participle construction. Anyhow

whatever term it is called, the intended meanings are the same. And also,

"Located on the River Thames, London is the capital of England."

"London is the capital of England, located on the River Thames."

All of them are possible forms and all of the meanings are the same. What do you native

English speakers think? Thank you so much as usual.

 

[Raymott]

"London, which is located on the River Thames, is the capital of England."

"London, located on the River Thames, is the capital of England."

I know that both are okay and the same and "located on..." is a reduced non defining relative

pronoun. And I think we also could call "located on..." is a participle construction. Anyhow

whatever term it is called, the intended meanings are the same. And also,

"Located on the River Thames, London is the capital of England."

"London is the capital of England, located on the River Thames."

All of them are possible forms and all of the meanings are the same. What do you native

English speakers think? Thank you so much as usual.

Yes, all that's true. They mean the same.

 

[sky3120]

Thank you, and some say "London is the capital of England, located on the River Thames."

is not natural because London, an antecedent is too apart from located on...What do you think? Thank you as usual.

​

 

[Rover_KE]

Thank you, and some say "London is the capital of England, located on the River Thames"

is not natural because the antecedent 'London', [STRIKE]an antecedent[/STRIKE] is too far from 'located on'...What do you think?

​

I agree; it could be misinterpreted, so why did you include it in post #1?

Rover

 

[Raymott]

Thank you, and some say "London is the capital of England, located on the River Thames."

is not natural because London, an antecedent is too apart from located on...What do you think? Thank you as usual.

​

Yes, a person could take that to mean that England was located on the River Thames. What I meant was that, when read in context by the average competent reader, they'd all mean the same. I wouldn't use that version myself.