Do they semantically is the same? Situation takes different?

Do they semantically is the same ---both of her 2 sons are policeman? But syntax is different and because of the syntax is different which made situation also different?



my example sentence:



. Restrictive: She has two sons who are policeman.

Non-Restrictive: She has two sons, who are policeman.







. Restrictive: She has two sons who are policeman.

My understand : yes , She has two sons who are policeman . Maybe she has other sons who are not P.L.A men. But it s only maybe .it s unknown from the “context”.





Non-Restrictive: She has two sons, who are policeman.

My understand: yes, She has two sons who are policeman.

But the point is she has two sons! “Who are policeman “is added information here. (She only has two sons from the “context”? or unknown?)





The difference between restrictive and non-restrictive clauses which I know as follows:


Restrictive: A suitcase that doesn't have handles is useless.
Non-Restrictive: The blue suitcase, which doesn't have handles, is useless.

'that doesn't have handles' is necessary information. If omitted, it renders the sentence semantically odd:

?A suitcase is useless.

Now, if we omit a non-restrictive clause, the sentence's meaning doesn't change:

The blue suitcase is useless.

'which doesn't have handles' is added information; it's a kind of "by the way, did you know this?" tag. It is not restricted. You can omit it.



Hi guys. Thanks u for the help, one more question: if I hear people say:"she has two sons(,) who are policeman . Then I wasn’t able to

know if there was a comma exist . how could I know the correct semantic ? or they just same semantic ? Situation takes different?