0

I was wondering whether these sentences are grammatically correct and whether they mean the same thing.

  1. There are no workers who are using these tools right now.
  2. There are no workers using these tools right now.
  3. There are no workers who use these tools.

Can present participle be used like this (in the second sentence)? And if so, then is there any distinction (if we omit "right now") whether the second sentence means the same as the first or the third one?

Edit: Removed commas before "who" in sentences 1 and 3 as they were incorrect, but not my main point of interest.

Bartłomiej Varil Kręgielewski
  • 7
  • 2
    Why are you putting a comma after workers in 1 and 3? – KillingTime Oct 25 '21 at 07:38
  • I agree with the last comment: the commas in 1. and 3. are wrong and should be dropped. – BillJ Oct 25 '21 at 07:40
  • Ok, they seemed right to me. Is there any rule whether comma before "who" should be dropped or not? – Bartłomiej Varil Kręgielewski Oct 25 '21 at 07:41
  • 2
    Yes; put simply, the relative who clauses are clearly defining ones, and hence they should not be set off by punctuation but integrated into the noun phrase. – BillJ Oct 25 '21 at 07:46
  • Thanks for explanation! I'll try to abide to that rule – Bartłomiej Varil Kręgielewski Oct 25 '21 at 07:48
  • The 3rd sentence is different from the others - it refers to workers who use those tools for their job, but it doesn't mean they're using the tools right now – Juliana Karasawa Souza Oct 25 '21 at 09:46
  • @Juliana Karasawa Souza The 3rd sentence is incorrect, period. // Bartłomiej: note that (3c) 'There are workers, who use these tools.' is not incorrect and means 'There are workers. They use these tools.' (3d) is also correct, and could be used in say the following way: 'There are workers who use these tools. Then there are those who prefer to use the more modern equipment.' – Edwin Ashworth Oct 25 '21 at 10:55
  • @Juliana Karasawa Souza yes, I aware of that (that's why I said "if we omit "right now"" in the second sentence). I'm more interested in whether the second sentence is correct and if there is any difference in meaning between using present participle and sentecnes with "who". Difference other than habitual/no habitual. – Bartłomiej Varil Kręgielewski Oct 25 '21 at 10:55
  • @Edwin Ashworth what do you mean by "3rd sentence is incorrect" and then later saying that it "is not incorrect"? I don't get your comment. – Bartłomiej Varil Kręgielewski Oct 25 '21 at 11:00
  • Regarding my previous comment. I see now, why you said that they were incorrect. It's because of that comma before "who". – Bartłomiej Varil Kręgielewski Oct 25 '21 at 11:11
  • There should be no comma in 'I see now why you said that they were incorrect.' // Sentence (3c) is a different but related sentence. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 25 '21 at 11:24

1 Answers1

0

Ignoring sentences (1) and (3), which are incorrect:

  • (2) There are no workers using these tools right now.

This implies (at least in most contexts) that there are workers in the universal set under consideration (eg on-site; in the coal industry worldwide ...) but either that none of them

  • (i) are using the said tools at this precise moment, perhaps broadened to say 'this morning' (logically, in a local setting), or
  • (ii) are using the said tools globally, for the time being.

..........

  • (2') There are no workers who are using these tools right now.

This would very often, perhaps almost always have the global reading, (ii) above.

Edwin Ashworth
  • 83,272