[Grammar] Do these sentences have the same meaning?

[jay2]

Hello guys~

Here are three sentences.
1. There were tall trees surrounding the lake.
2. There were tall trees which surrounded the lake.
3. There were tall trees which were surrounding the lake.

Are they grammatically correct?
If so, do they have the same meaning?
I'm looking foward to your answers.

 

[MikeNewYork]

Hello guys~

Here are three sentences.
1. There were tall trees surrounding the lake.
2. There were tall trees which surrounded the lake.
3. There were tall trees which were surrounding the lake.

Are they grammatically correct?
If so, do they have the same meaning?
I'm looking foward to your answers.

Yes, same meaning. All correct. I prefer the first.

 

[anhnha]

I wonder why #2 and #3 have the same meaning as they use different tenses.
2. There were tall trees which surrounded the lake.
3. There were tall trees which were surrounding the lake.

 

[MikeNewYork]

I wonder why #2 and #3 have the same meaning as they use different tenses.
2. There were tall trees which surrounded the lake.
3. There were tall trees which were surrounding the lake.

They have the same meaning because trees don't move. They surround the lake.

 

[Raymott]

They have the same meaning because trees don't move. [...]

Trees moved in Macbeth.
"Macbeth shall never vanquished be, until Great Birnam wood to high Dunsinane hill Shall come against him." And it happened.
Whether one sentence means the same as another depends on several things: the context (including stylistic issues), your definition of 'meaning' and 'same', and how pedantic you want to be.
I'd like to know more about the reason for the OP's question. Was he told that one sentence was wrong in a certain context? If he's told that they mean the same thing, will he assume that any one will do in a certain situation?

 

[MikeNewYork]

Trees moved in Macbeth.
"Macbeth shall never vanquished be, until Great Birnam wood to high Dunsinane hill Shall come against him." And it happened.
Whether one sentence means the same as another depends on several things: the context (including stylistic issues), your definition of 'meaning' and 'same', and how pedantic you want to be.
I'd like to know more about the reason for the OP's question. Was he told that one sentence was wrong in a certain context? If he's told that they mean the same thing, will he assume that any one will do in a certain situation?

Macbeth, Shakespearian magic, and philosophy aside, my guess is he was describing trees around a lake.

 

[jay2]

Let's say trees are controlled by a magical power in a fairy tale. So, the trees can move.
In this situation, #1,2 and 3 still have the same meaning?

 

[MikeNewYork]

Let's say trees are controlled by a magical power in a fairy tale. So, the trees can move.
In this situation, #1,2 and 3 still have the same meaning?

Yes. They still haven't moved.