1. The boy who ate fruit came.
  2. The boy came who ate fruit. Here both sentences have relative clause "who ate fruit" and a principal clause "the boy came". Here is my question: Both sentences convey same meaning right? If they're different what is the difference in meaning? And could we use verb of principal clause after a relative clause as in sentence 1 and word order of sentence 1 is correct?

1 Answer 1


The 1st example is correct. The relative clause modifies the subject 'boy'.

The 2nd example is unusual.

  • 2
    The second one is very much marked as poetic or archaic, yeah. The structure can definitely be found in older Bible translations, for example, or in Milton's famous sonnet: "They also serve who stand and wait." Mar 20, 2021 at 3:42

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .