negative + non-restrictive clause

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Anonymous

Guest
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.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
ntasan said:
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.
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
Take the commas out and they will start making sense. :lol:
 

MikeNewYork

VIP Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
ntasan

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

navi tasan

Key Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2002
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
Armenian
Home Country
Iran
Current Location
United States
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.
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
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. :roll:
 

MikeNewYork

VIP Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
commas

navi tasan said:
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.
 

Daruma

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2008
Member Type
Student or Learner
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. :roll:


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

svartnik

Banned
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Member Type
Student or Learner
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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top