JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

comma/not before 'who' [relative pronoun]: an Iowa native who's come

spearfish

Member
English
Does the sentence below require a comma before "who's," or is sentence two correct? Are both correct depending on the context and meaning of the speaker? I would appreciate an explanation of the grammar. And thanks for the help.

1. I am an Iowa native who's come home to help on the farm.

2. I am an Iowa native, who's come home to help on the farm.
1. I am an Iowa native who's come home to help on the farm.

2. I am an Iowa native, who's come home to help on the farm.

I think here we have the case of the restrictive (1), and non-restrictive (2) relative clauses. The first sentence means that from Iowa's natives (or from a group of Iowa's natives) I'm the only that has come to help. The second means that apart from me there may be other Iowa's natives who would (have) come. That's , however, sheer grammar matters and it's hardly probable to concentrate always on such details .
1. I am an Iowa native who's come home to help on the farm.

2. I am an Iowa native, who's come home to help on the farm.

I think here we have the case of the restrictive (1), and non-restrictive (2) relative clauses. The first sentence means that from Iowa's natives (or from a group of Iowa's natives) I'm the only that has come to help. The second means that apart from me there may be other Iowa's natives who would (have) come. That's , however, sheer grammar matters and it's hardly probable to concentrate always on such details .

This would make sense if it were "I am the Iowa native" but not "I am an Iowa native". There is nothing in this that means he (or she) is the only one.
1. I am an Iowa native who's come home to help on the farm.
2. I am an Iowa native, who's come home to help on the farm.
I see 1. as "I am an Iowa native (削除) who's (削除ここまで) come home to help on the farm. and
2. I am an Iowa native. I have come home to help on the farm.

If the "Iowa native" is substituted for something more startling, Perseas's subtle difference becomes clearer:
1. "I am a Martian (削除) who's (削除ここまで) come home to help on the farm. - and
2. I am a Martian. I have come home to help on the farm.
Paul is right. The version in sentence 1. was my intended meaning--although I didn't expect you guys to know that. I was confused about the phrase "who's come home," and I intended it to be restrictive, as it is in the first example. Thanks for clearing things up, everybody.
Top Bottom

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /