[Grammar] Questions about grammar

  • Thread starter Cap1034
  • Start date
  • Views : 1,666
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cap1034

Guest
1 He speculated about the possible involvement of the President.

Does this mean "he speculated that the President might have been involved in this?"

2 If we learn he was involved, we may be more inclined to ask, with Johnson, "who else is involved in this case?"

What does this "with" mean?
 

SoothingDave

VIP Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Member Type
Interested in Language
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
Your questions have to do with semantics, not grammar. You should follow the forum rules and title your posts with words that describe your question.

1. Yes.

2. Johnson is asking and we would be joining Johnson in also asking.
 
C

Cap1034

Guest
Sorry about the title.

Thank you for your answers.
So this "with" is here "according to?"
Like," the following is what John said"?
 

SoothingDave

VIP Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Member Type
Interested in Language
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
Sorry about the title.

Thank you for your answers.
So this "with" is here "according to?"
Like," the following is what John said"?

No, "along with." "Joining with." Johnson is asking X. We are also asking X. We join Johnson in asking X.
 
C

Cap1034

Guest
However, what about this?

"With Adam Smith, government was just an interference, something to be done away with."
 

SoothingDave

VIP Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Member Type
Interested in Language
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
However, what about this?

"With Adam Smith, government was just an interference, something to be done away with."

Yes. Using Adam Smith's arguments. Or "according to Smith."

Note that there was likely some discussion of someone else's ideas before that. So the "with" serves as a contrast to what came before it.
 
C

Cap1034

Guest
So that's why I thought that the "with" in the thread sentence was also of the same kind.
What do you think? Is it also a legitimate interpretation?
 

SoothingDave

VIP Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Member Type
Interested in Language
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
So that's why I thought that the "with" in the thread sentence was also of the same kind.
What do you think? Is it also a legitimate interpretation?

No.

I could see it meaning that Johnson is involved and we need to ask who else was involved with him. Context would help, as always.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top