[title]Family quotes[/title] [description]Welcome to our family quotes section! Here you'll find some of the funniest (and wisest) quotes on the subject of family life![/description]
Learn English and meet people on the world’s largest EFL social network

We have partnered with TradePub to bring you free industry magazines and resources - no coupons or credit cards required!

Visit: englishforums.tradepub.com


1 2 3 4
Share this topic:
This question is Answered
1 verified answer
Latest post Mon, May 11 2009 1:42 AM by Clive. 31 replies.
Suggest an answer | | |
Taka  +  721490 Fri, 08 May 09 04:18 PM
・I have two daughters who became musicians.
・I have two daughters, who became musicians.


What do you native speakers think the semantic difference between these is?

Best answer by Yankee  +  721493 Fri, 08 May 09 04:27 PM
Hi Taka


One difference is that it is clear to me is that in the second sentence the speaker has exactly two daughters.


In your first sentence, the speaker might have only two daughters, or there might be more than two. However, no matter how many daughters there are, only two of the daughters became musicians.

All the other replies..
Taka  +  721495 Fri, 08 May 09 04:29 PM
In other words, if you have only two daughters, you cannot use the first sentence?
Yankee  +  721498 Fri, 08 May 09 04:34 PM
You can use either sentence if there are exactly two daughters. 


However, in my opinion, if there were three daughters, you could only use the first sentence. The first sentence could possibly be a reference to "two of my three daughters", for example.

Taka  +  721505 Fri, 08 May 09 04:50 PM
Yankee
“You can use either sentence if there are exactly two daughters. ”


How come it's possible to use the restricted 'who' when you have exactly two daughters, no more?

Yankee  +  721531 Fri, 08 May 09 05:13 PM
Hi Taka


This is how I look at things:


"I have two daughters, who are muscians."

The phrase "who are musicians" is extra information (i.e. non-restricting).  Thus, first you have a simple statement of fact: 

I have two daughters.

Then you basically have an afterthought which amounts to something like this:

Oh, and by the way, both of my daughters are musicians.


------------------------------------------------------------------


"I have two daughters who are muscians."


This sentence modifies the meaning of "two daughters", but it does not state that there are only two daughters.  It only restricts the meaning of the particular two daughters being referred to. For example:


I have six kids. I have two daughters who are musicians. I have one daughter who is an ESL teacher. And all three of my sons are graphic designers.




Taka  +  721551 Fri, 08 May 09 05:27 PM
In your examples, you have six kids and then identifed the two daughers by using the restrictive 'who'.


You said, even if I had only two daughers, no more, I could still use the restrictive 'who'. I wonder what kind of case it could be used for.


Yankee  +  721568 Fri, 08 May 09 05:42 PM
One possible scenario I can imagine for "I have two daughters who are musicians" being a statement about someone's only two daughters OR about two of several daughters might be a conversation something like this:


A: Do you have any kids?


B: Yes, a son, who we're very proud of. He's a musician, and he just got accepted at Juilliard on a full scholarship.


A: Wow! That's impressive. I have two daughters who are musicians. They both tried to get into Juilliard but didn't get accepted.

Taka  +  721594 Fri, 08 May 09 06:08 PM
I'm trying to figure out why in your example that restrictive who works. Is the feel of the restrictive usage behind the statement of your A something like 'Yes, I have two daughters. They do not do usual jobs. They are, like your son, also musicians (i.e. not just two daughters but two who are both musicians')?
1 2 3 4
© MediaCet Ltd. 2009, v5.0.3616.28671. All content posted by our users is a contribution to the public domain, this does not include imported usenet posts.*
For web related enquires please contact us on webmaster@mediacet.com, status updates are available at status.mediacet.com.
*Usenet post removal: Use 'X-No-Archive'. You may not have understood that your posts would end up in the public domain. Please send proof of the poster's email, we will remove immediately.