I just came across the following sentence;

A company with 1,000 employees who each send eight e-mail messages per workday would produce two million messages per year.

where who each send sounds incorrect. "who each send" (used in Google-Books)

After I tried to compare "who each send", and "who all send" on Google-Ngrams, no ngram was found for the first one. So, is it grammatical?


The sentence is actually correct.

Another alternative to write the sentence would be:

A company with 1,000 employees who send eight e-mail messages per workday each, would produce two million messages per year.

This reduces the confusion, as each and send are no longer together. All does not match the purpose, because each employee sends 8 email messages per day, not all of them only 8 messages.

  • I'd agree that 'all' is a bad alternative ^^, and that your modified-version of the sentence is better. However, I don't think the original sentence is grammatically sound. Is there a better alternative to 'each' while keeping the word other the same? – Zeeshan Ali May 28 '19 at 5:52
  • 1
    You can use "everybody", but it is definitely worse and ungrammatical. The original sentence is quite sound grammatically, even if it looks a bit strange. – virolino May 28 '19 at 5:56
  • 'everybody' would not even be an alternative to 'each' in that sentence. How about using 'each of who sends' instead of 'who each sends'? – Zeeshan Ali May 28 '19 at 6:19
  • I'm struggling to accept the first statement of your answer: "The sentence is actually correct.". ^^ – Zeeshan Ali May 28 '19 at 6:21
  • Te sentence can work without using "each" at all. But in that case, it would be ambiguous, who sends emails? All of them only 8 messages, or each of them sends 8? The author decided to place "each" as a subject in the subordinate clause, in the first place (after "who"), before the verb ("sends"). – virolino May 28 '19 at 6:26

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.