1. She has a watch made in Switzerland.
2. She has a watch which is made in Switzerland.
3. She has a watch which was made in Switzerland.
4. She has a watch which has been made in Switzerland.
5. She has a watch having made in Switzerland.
(What does #1 mean? Does it mean #2, #3, or #4? What about #5? Do #3 and #4 mean #5?)
#5 is incorrect. The others are stating where her watch was made.
In the context of these sentences:
1. "She has a watch made in Switzerland" means that the watch she possesses is currently made in Switzerland.
2. "She has a watch which is made in Switzerland" has the same meaning as sentence 1.
3. "She has a watch which was made in Switzerland" suggests that the watch was made in Switzerland at some point in the past, but it doesn't explicitly state whether it is still made there now. This sentence implies a past action.
4. "She has a watch which has been made in Switzerland" indicates that the watch was made in Switzerland in the past and it is still made there. The use of "has been made" implies a recent or ongoing action.
5. "She has a watch having made in Switzerland" is ungrammatical. It does not convey a clear meaning and is not commonly used in English. It is not equivalent to sentences 3 or 4.
So, sentences 1, 2, and 4 convey the same meaning, indicating that the watch she possesses is currently made in Switzerland. Sentence 3 implies a past action, and sentence 5 is not a valid construction.