Clare, who I work with, is organising the London marathon this year
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I have read a rule of relative clause reductions, and it states,
2. We can use participles when reducing the sentence.
a) Present Participle "V-ing" (simultaneous)
1) We stood on the bridge which connects the two halves of the city.
//the relative clause is a defining clause.
a) We stood on the bridge connecting the two halves of the city.
//omitting by replacing them with present participle
Since the example has stated only about a sentence that contains a defining clause, that makes me curious whether we can also omit the pronouns with or without the to be verb in the non-defining relative clauses of the sentences below,
2) Clare, who works with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
3) Clare, who is working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
into this sentence:
b) Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
If so, why?
ielts
asked 22 hours ago
gunnuu1993
246
New contributor
gunnuu1993 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
|
show 15 more comments
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I have read a rule of relative clause reductions, and it states,
2. We can use participles when reducing the sentence.
a) Present Participle "V-ing" (simultaneous)
1) We stood on the bridge which connects the two halves of the city.
//the relative clause is a defining clause.
a) We stood on the bridge connecting the two halves of the city.
//omitting by replacing them with present participle
Since the example has stated only about a sentence that contains a defining clause, that makes me curious whether we can also omit the pronouns with or without the to be verb in the non-defining relative clauses of the sentences below,
2) Clare, who works with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
3) Clare, who is working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
into this sentence:
b) Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
If so, why?
ielts
asked 22 hours ago
gunnuu1993
246
New contributor
gunnuu1993 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
3
It changes the meaning -- think again.
– Kris
22 hours ago
Congratulations on your doing the London marathon.
– TimLymington
22 hours ago
1
I'm not a native speaker @Kris. Could you tell me what the meaning of "Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year." is please?
– gunnuu1993
22 hours ago
1
Also, the answer from Chasly should be of help to you. Good Luck.
– Kris
22 hours ago
4
Could it be as simple as "Clare, with whom I work, is organizing the London marathon this year"? To my eyes that completely removes any ambiguity and reads better too.
– Spratty
16 hours ago
|
show 15 more comments
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I have read a rule of relative clause reductions, and it states,
2. We can use participles when reducing the sentence.
a) Present Participle "V-ing" (simultaneous)
1) We stood on the bridge which connects the two halves of the city.
//the relative clause is a defining clause.
a) We stood on the bridge connecting the two halves of the city.
//omitting by replacing them with present participle
Since the example has stated only about a sentence that contains a defining clause, that makes me curious whether we can also omit the pronouns with or without the to be verb in the non-defining relative clauses of the sentences below,
2) Clare, who works with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
3) Clare, who is working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
into this sentence:
b) Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
If so, why?
ielts
asked 22 hours ago
gunnuu1993
246
New contributor
gunnuu1993 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I have read a rule of relative clause reductions, and it states,
2. We can use participles when reducing the sentence.
a) Present Participle "V-ing" (simultaneous)
1) We stood on the bridge which connects the two halves of the city.
//the relative clause is a defining clause.
a) We stood on the bridge connecting the two halves of the city.
//omitting by replacing them with present participle
Since the example has stated only about a sentence that contains a defining clause, that makes me curious whether we can also omit the pronouns with or without the to be verb in the non-defining relative clauses of the sentences below,
2) Clare, who works with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
3) Clare, who is working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
into this sentence:
b) Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
If so, why?
ielts
ielts
asked 22 hours ago
gunnuu1993
246
New contributor
gunnuu1993 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 22 hours ago
gunnuu1993
246
New contributor
gunnuu1993 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 41 mins ago
asked 22 hours ago
gunnuu1993
246
New contributor
gunnuu1993 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 22 hours ago
gunnuu1993
246
asked 22 hours ago
gunnuu1993
246
246
New contributor
gunnuu1993 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
gunnuu1993 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
gunnuu1993 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
3
It changes the meaning -- think again.
– Kris
22 hours ago
Congratulations on your doing the London marathon.
– TimLymington
22 hours ago
1
I'm not a native speaker @Kris. Could you tell me what the meaning of "Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year." is please?
– gunnuu1993
22 hours ago
1
Also, the answer from Chasly should be of help to you. Good Luck.
– Kris
22 hours ago
4
Could it be as simple as "Clare, with whom I work, is organizing the London marathon this year"? To my eyes that completely removes any ambiguity and reads better too.
– Spratty
16 hours ago
|
show 15 more comments
3
It changes the meaning -- think again.
– Kris
22 hours ago
Congratulations on your doing the London marathon.
– TimLymington
22 hours ago
1
I'm not a native speaker @Kris. Could you tell me what the meaning of "Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year." is please?
– gunnuu1993
22 hours ago
1
Also, the answer from Chasly should be of help to you. Good Luck.
– Kris
22 hours ago
4
Could it be as simple as "Clare, with whom I work, is organizing the London marathon this year"? To my eyes that completely removes any ambiguity and reads better too.
– Spratty
16 hours ago
3
3
It changes the meaning -- think again.
– Kris
22 hours ago
It changes the meaning -- think again.
– Kris
22 hours ago
Congratulations on your doing the London marathon.
– TimLymington
22 hours ago
Congratulations on your doing the London marathon.
– TimLymington
22 hours ago
1
1
I'm not a native speaker @Kris. Could you tell me what the meaning of "Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year." is please?
– gunnuu1993
22 hours ago
I'm not a native speaker @Kris. Could you tell me what the meaning of "Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year." is please?
– gunnuu1993
22 hours ago
1
1
Also, the answer from Chasly should be of help to you. Good Luck.
– Kris
22 hours ago
Also, the answer from Chasly should be of help to you. Good Luck.
– Kris
22 hours ago
4
4
Could it be as simple as "Clare, with whom I work, is organizing the London marathon this year"? To my eyes that completely removes any ambiguity and reads better too.
– Spratty
16 hours ago
Could it be as simple as "Clare, with whom I work, is organizing the London marathon this year"? To my eyes that completely removes any ambiguity and reads better too.
– Spratty
16 hours ago
|
show 15 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
12
down vote
As Kris points out in a comment, this doesn't work.
Clare, who works with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
Clare is organising. I don't necessarily have any connection with the event. It happens that Clare works with me.
Clare, who is working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
This sentence is slightly ambiguous but, as a native speaker, I would interpret it to mean, "Clare, who currently is working with me, is organising the London marathon this year."
Again I may not have any involvement with the marathon.
Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
This indicates unambiguously that Clare and I are working together on the organisation of the marathon.
Explanation
In the first two, "who is working with me"is adjectival and describes something about Clare.
In the last sentence, "working with me" is adverbial to the verb 'organising'.
answered 22 hours ago
chasly from UK
22k12965
2
I think there would be even more ambiguity if we said: Clare, who I am working with, is organising the London marathon this year. In that case, it's even a little harder to tell if the “work“ refers to the marathon, or some other employment.
– J.R.
21 hours ago
1
@J.R. That’s funny – I perceive almost no ambiguity in that version. I really have to stretch my understanding to turn it into a case of ‘I’ organising the marathon together with Clare.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
20 hours ago
1
The last one sounds really strange to me. (And totally ambiguous.)
– Fattie
18 hours ago
1
@JanusBahsJacquet It could be the case that the organizing the marathon is part of a larger body of work. For example if the speaker was the lead manager of the construction of a building and said "Claire, who I am working with, is overseeing the elevator installation".
– JimmyJames
16 hours ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
12
down vote
As Kris points out in a comment, this doesn't work.
Clare, who works with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
Clare is organising. I don't necessarily have any connection with the event. It happens that Clare works with me.
Clare, who is working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
This sentence is slightly ambiguous but, as a native speaker, I would interpret it to mean, "Clare, who currently is working with me, is organising the London marathon this year."
Again I may not have any involvement with the marathon.
Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
This indicates unambiguously that Clare and I are working together on the organisation of the marathon.
Explanation
In the first two, "who is working with me"is adjectival and describes something about Clare.
In the last sentence, "working with me" is adverbial to the verb 'organising'.
answered 22 hours ago
chasly from UK
22k12965
2
I think there would be even more ambiguity if we said: Clare, who I am working with, is organising the London marathon this year. In that case, it's even a little harder to tell if the “work“ refers to the marathon, or some other employment.
– J.R.
21 hours ago
1
@J.R. That’s funny – I perceive almost no ambiguity in that version. I really have to stretch my understanding to turn it into a case of ‘I’ organising the marathon together with Clare.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
20 hours ago
1
The last one sounds really strange to me. (And totally ambiguous.)
– Fattie
18 hours ago
1
@JanusBahsJacquet It could be the case that the organizing the marathon is part of a larger body of work. For example if the speaker was the lead manager of the construction of a building and said "Claire, who I am working with, is overseeing the elevator installation".
– JimmyJames
16 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
12
down vote
As Kris points out in a comment, this doesn't work.
Clare, who works with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
Clare is organising. I don't necessarily have any connection with the event. It happens that Clare works with me.
Clare, who is working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
This sentence is slightly ambiguous but, as a native speaker, I would interpret it to mean, "Clare, who currently is working with me, is organising the London marathon this year."
Again I may not have any involvement with the marathon.
Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
This indicates unambiguously that Clare and I are working together on the organisation of the marathon.
Explanation
In the first two, "who is working with me"is adjectival and describes something about Clare.
In the last sentence, "working with me" is adverbial to the verb 'organising'.
answered 22 hours ago
chasly from UK
22k12965
2
I think there would be even more ambiguity if we said: Clare, who I am working with, is organising the London marathon this year. In that case, it's even a little harder to tell if the “work“ refers to the marathon, or some other employment.
– J.R.
21 hours ago
1
@J.R. That’s funny – I perceive almost no ambiguity in that version. I really have to stretch my understanding to turn it into a case of ‘I’ organising the marathon together with Clare.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
20 hours ago
1
The last one sounds really strange to me. (And totally ambiguous.)
– Fattie
18 hours ago
1
@JanusBahsJacquet It could be the case that the organizing the marathon is part of a larger body of work. For example if the speaker was the lead manager of the construction of a building and said "Claire, who I am working with, is overseeing the elevator installation".
– JimmyJames
16 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
12
down vote
up vote
12
down vote
As Kris points out in a comment, this doesn't work.
Clare, who works with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
Clare is organising. I don't necessarily have any connection with the event. It happens that Clare works with me.
Clare, who is working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
This sentence is slightly ambiguous but, as a native speaker, I would interpret it to mean, "Clare, who currently is working with me, is organising the London marathon this year."
Again I may not have any involvement with the marathon.
Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
This indicates unambiguously that Clare and I are working together on the organisation of the marathon.
Explanation
In the first two, "who is working with me"is adjectival and describes something about Clare.
In the last sentence, "working with me" is adverbial to the verb 'organising'.
answered 22 hours ago
chasly from UK
22k12965
As Kris points out in a comment, this doesn't work.
Clare, who works with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
Clare is organising. I don't necessarily have any connection with the event. It happens that Clare works with me.
Clare, who is working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
This sentence is slightly ambiguous but, as a native speaker, I would interpret it to mean, "Clare, who currently is working with me, is organising the London marathon this year."
Again I may not have any involvement with the marathon.
Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year.
This indicates unambiguously that Clare and I are working together on the organisation of the marathon.
Explanation
In the first two, "who is working with me"is adjectival and describes something about Clare.
In the last sentence, "working with me" is adverbial to the verb 'organising'.
answered 22 hours ago
chasly from UK
22k12965
answered 22 hours ago
chasly from UK
22k12965
answered 22 hours ago
chasly from UK
22k12965
answered 22 hours ago
chasly from UK
22k12965
22k12965
2
I think there would be even more ambiguity if we said: Clare, who I am working with, is organising the London marathon this year. In that case, it's even a little harder to tell if the “work“ refers to the marathon, or some other employment.
– J.R.
21 hours ago
1
@J.R. That’s funny – I perceive almost no ambiguity in that version. I really have to stretch my understanding to turn it into a case of ‘I’ organising the marathon together with Clare.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
20 hours ago
1
The last one sounds really strange to me. (And totally ambiguous.)
– Fattie
18 hours ago
1
@JanusBahsJacquet It could be the case that the organizing the marathon is part of a larger body of work. For example if the speaker was the lead manager of the construction of a building and said "Claire, who I am working with, is overseeing the elevator installation".
– JimmyJames
16 hours ago
add a comment |
2
I think there would be even more ambiguity if we said: Clare, who I am working with, is organising the London marathon this year. In that case, it's even a little harder to tell if the “work“ refers to the marathon, or some other employment.
– J.R.
21 hours ago
1
@J.R. That’s funny – I perceive almost no ambiguity in that version. I really have to stretch my understanding to turn it into a case of ‘I’ organising the marathon together with Clare.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
20 hours ago
1
The last one sounds really strange to me. (And totally ambiguous.)
– Fattie
18 hours ago
1
@JanusBahsJacquet It could be the case that the organizing the marathon is part of a larger body of work. For example if the speaker was the lead manager of the construction of a building and said "Claire, who I am working with, is overseeing the elevator installation".
– JimmyJames
16 hours ago
2
2
I think there would be even more ambiguity if we said: Clare, who I am working with, is organising the London marathon this year. In that case, it's even a little harder to tell if the “work“ refers to the marathon, or some other employment.
– J.R.
21 hours ago
I think there would be even more ambiguity if we said: Clare, who I am working with, is organising the London marathon this year. In that case, it's even a little harder to tell if the “work“ refers to the marathon, or some other employment.
– J.R.
21 hours ago
1
1
@J.R. That’s funny – I perceive almost no ambiguity in that version. I really have to stretch my understanding to turn it into a case of ‘I’ organising the marathon together with Clare.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
20 hours ago
@J.R. That’s funny – I perceive almost no ambiguity in that version. I really have to stretch my understanding to turn it into a case of ‘I’ organising the marathon together with Clare.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
20 hours ago
1
1
The last one sounds really strange to me. (And totally ambiguous.)
– Fattie
18 hours ago
The last one sounds really strange to me. (And totally ambiguous.)
– Fattie
18 hours ago
1
1
@JanusBahsJacquet It could be the case that the organizing the marathon is part of a larger body of work. For example if the speaker was the lead manager of the construction of a building and said "Claire, who I am working with, is overseeing the elevator installation".
– JimmyJames
16 hours ago
@JanusBahsJacquet It could be the case that the organizing the marathon is part of a larger body of work. For example if the speaker was the lead manager of the construction of a building and said "Claire, who I am working with, is overseeing the elevator installation".
– JimmyJames
16 hours ago
add a comment |
gunnuu1993 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
gunnuu1993 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
gunnuu1993 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
gunnuu1993 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f473077%2fclare-who-i-work-with-is-organising-the-london-marathon-this-year%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
It changes the meaning -- think again.
– Kris
22 hours ago
Congratulations on your doing the London marathon.
– TimLymington
22 hours ago
1
I'm not a native speaker @Kris. Could you tell me what the meaning of "Clare, working with me, is organising the London marathon this year." is please?
– gunnuu1993
22 hours ago
1
Also, the answer from Chasly should be of help to you. Good Luck.
– Kris
22 hours ago
4
Could it be as simple as "Clare, with whom I work, is organizing the London marathon this year"? To my eyes that completely removes any ambiguity and reads better too.
– Spratty
16 hours ago