She has a son who is a doctor.

Question

0 I know the sentence sounds strange.  Does the defining-relative clause 'who is a doctor' here literally 'define' or 'identify' the antecedent 'a son'?   02br02br00Thanks in advance. 0-

Guest · Accepted Answer

0 Hello Infinity. 02br
02br
00I'm a learner too, but I'd like to tell you what I know anout it. 02br
02br
00YES, "who is a doctor' actually defines the antecedent 'a son'. 02br
00Your sentence is saying: 02br
00 "She may have two or more sons, but only one among them is a doctor". 02br
02br
00... 02br
02br
0-

Clive · Answer

0 Sure. She has a son who is a doctor and another son who isn't. 02br
00Clive 0-

Infinity · Answer

0 Thanks Clive. 02br
00The reason why this sounds strange to me is because I cannot think of a situation in which you have to use ‘she has a son who is a doctor’, instead of ‘Her son is a doctor’ or ‘One of her sons is a doctor’. 02br
02br
00So my question now is if this sentence could exist other than as a mere example 0-

MrPedantic · Answer

0 Well, Google brings up what seems to be one genuine example! 02br
02br
00So it is possible outside textbooks, though probably rare: 02br
02br
00"I met MrsQ's son the other day." 02br
00"Oh yes, he's a surgeon, isn't he?" 02br
00"I don't think any of her sons are surgeons. 01b00She has a son who is a doctor.02b00 But it wasn't that son, anyway. The son I met was a grammarian." 02br
00"A grammarian! Poor MrsQ. No wonder she keeps quiet about him." 02br
02br
00MrP 0-

Infinity · Answer

0 Thanks, Mr.P 02br
00I was wondering if there's any logic behind this preference. 0-

Julielai · Answer

0 01blockquote

00A grammarian! Poor MrsQ. No wonder she keeps quiet about him.12blockquote

12br
02br
00Talking about a grammarian behind his back! 02br
02br
00hmmm... perhaps we should mind our Mr. P.'s and Mrs. Q's. 05000 051010id211id2

MrPedantic · Answer

0 Me and MrsQ...we got a thing going on... 0-

MrPedantic · Answer

0 01blockquote

00...I was wondering if there's any logic behind this preference...12blockquote

12br
00In other words: in what kind of situation might we need to state separately a) the fact that 'she has a son' b) the fact that 'he is a doctor'. 02br
02br
00Or to put it another way: in what situations would 'her son is a doctor' not suffice? 02br
02br
00I'll have to think about that one, infinity. 02br
02br
00MrP 0-

Infinity · Answer

0 Yes, MrP, that's what I want to know. 0-

Khoff · Answer

0 So the question is, when would we say "she has a son who is a doctor," rather than just "her son is a doctor"? 02br
02br
00I'd say the former would be used if it had not been previously known or mentioned that she had a son at all - you are asserting that there is a son, and that he is a doctor, at the same time. The second example ("her son is a doctor") would more likely be used if the listener already knew that she had a son. 02br
02br
00Another possible distinction could be that you would use the "she has a son" construction if you were more interested in conveying information about the woman than about the son. (Why does she think she's better than everyone else? Oh, her friends just have mink coats and big cars, but she has a son who is a doctor!) You could use the other construction in this situation, but I think that making the mother the subject of the sentence puts a little more emphasis on her, rather than on the son. 02br
02br
00In most cases, I think you could use either form and it would be a very hard-to-explain choice. 0-

She has a son who is a doctor.

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions