Non-restrictive clause

Question

I'm trying to understand the difference between restrictive clause and non-restrictive clause.
There are 4 examples
1.The officer helped the civilians who had been shot.
2.The officer helped the civilians, who had been shot.
3.Current accurate stereo algorithms employ some key techniques, which seem not to be suitable for parallel GPU architecture.
4.Current accurate stereo algorithms employ some key techniques that seem not to be suitable for parallel GPU architecture.

I have understood #1 means the officer helped only the wounded civilians. and #2 changes the meaning suggesting that all the civilians had been shot.
I wonder whether the #3 express the same meaning as #4 does, or they have the difference?

AlpheccaStars · Accepted Answer

1.The officer helped the civilians who had been shot. This is a natural English sentence.
2.The officer helped the civilians, who had been shot. This sentence is not natural. A native speaker would understand it as #1. This pair is not a good example of the meaning differences between restrictive and non-restrictive clauses.

3.Current accurate stereo algorithms employ some key techniques, which seem not to be suitable for parallel GPU architecture. The clause, in my opinion is necessary for the key meaning of the sentence. It should be written as in #4, or as below:.
3.Current accurate stereo algorithms employ key techniques, some of which seem not to be suitable for parallel GPU architecture.

4.Current accurate stereo algorithms employ some key techniques that seem not to be suitable for parallel GPU architecture. This pair is not a good example of the meaning differences between restrictive and non-restrictive clauses.

Here is a better contrast between restrictive and non-restrictive clauses:

My aunt, who lives in Chicago, is very sick. (I have an aunt who is sick. By the way, she happens to live in Chicago.)
My aunt who lives in Chicago is very sick. (I have several aunts. The one in Chicago is sick.)

The horse, which has a blue ribbon, won first prize. This is not correct. The blue ribbon defines the winning horse. The correct version is below:
The horse which has a blue ribbon won first prize.

Fivejedjon · Answer

AlpheccaStars2.The officer helped the civilians, who had been shot. This sentence is not natural. A native speaker would understand it as #1. This pair is not a good example of the meaning differences between restrictive and non-restrictive clauses.

This is natural enough in BrE, and would be understood in the way Fatpoisson suggested.

Non-restrictive clause

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions