Results 1 to 6 of 6
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • Switzerland

    • Join Date: Aug 2009
    • Posts: 1,676
    #1

    With

    "The autonomy of the organizations emanates from national law, with each state determining its extent."

    What is the function of "with" in the above sentence? To specify? Is there a grammatical term for this function?

    Thanks.
    Last edited by Allen165; 15-Oct-2010 at 15:12.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Dec 2009
    • Posts: 6,332
    #2

    Re: With

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasmin165 View Post
    "The autonomy of the organizations emanates from national law, with each state determining its extent."

    What is the function of "with" in the above sentence? To specifiy? Is there a grammatical term for this function?

    Thanks.
    ***** NOT A TEACHER *****

    (1) After checking my grammar books, I think that the following may be

    correct:

    (a) with each state determining its extent is an "adverbial

    participial clause."

    (b) It is introduced by "with," which some newer grammars classify

    as a "subordinator," and older grammars continue to call a

    "preposition." One of these older books adds:

    "...the introductory preposition is the sign of subordination to the

    principal verb."

    (c) It appears that "with each state determining its extent" is an example

    of accompanying circumstance.


    ***** NOT A TEACHER *****

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • Switzerland

    • Join Date: Aug 2009
    • Posts: 1,676
    #3

    Re: With

    Quote Originally Posted by TheParser View Post
    ***** NOT A TEACHER *****

    (1) After checking my grammar books, I think that the following may be

    correct:

    (a) with each state determining its extent is an "adverbial

    participial clause."

    (b) It is introduced by "with," which some newer grammars classify

    as a "subordinator," and older grammars continue to call a

    "preposition." One of these older books adds:

    "...the introductory preposition is the sign of subordination to the

    principal verb."

    (c) It appears that "with each state determining its extent" is an example

    of accompanying circumstance.


    ***** NOT A TEACHER *****
    Thank you very much for your efforts, Parser.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Dec 2009
    • Posts: 6,332
    #4

    Re: With

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasmin165 View Post
    "The autonomy of the organizations emanates from national law, with each state determining its extent."

    What is the function of "with" in the above sentence? To specify? Is there a grammatical term for this function?

    Thanks.
    ***** NOT A TEACHER *****

    (1) I have found some more information.

    (2) The famous grammarian Otto Jespersen (whose first language was

    not English!!!) reminds us that the use of "with" in such sentences

    "means virtually the same thing as having."

    (a) His example:

    She came the whole length of the immense room, with everyone

    looking at her.

    (i) I guess (guess!!!) your sentence could be reworded something like:

    The autonomy emanates from national law, having each state determine its

    extent.

    (3) Our friend Bryan A. Garner seems to be rather unhappy with this kind

    of construction.

    (a) He likes: Jacobson/He being absent, the party was a bore.

    (i) He calls this a nominative absolute. It is not grammatically linked to

    the main sentence. The whole phrase adverbially modifies some verb.

    (I guess he means that the above sentence is a short way to say:

    Because/since Jacobson/He was absent, the party was a bore.)

    (b) He does not like adding "with." He says that "With Jacobson

    absent, the party was a bore" is not a nominative absolute. He calls it

    an "objective absolute," presumably because it is the object of the

    preposition "with." (A real nominative absolute always has the subject

    in the nominative case. His example: He being absent, ...)



    (c) And he really dislikes changing "He being absent...." to the

    possessive "His being absent...."

    (d) He also has this to say about "with."

    (i) "With is increasingly being used as a quasi-conjunction [Is that

    why Professor Quirk chooses to call it a subordinator?] to introduce a tag-

    on idea at the end of the sentence. The sense is close to and." [Very

    interesting!!!]

    He then adds: "Avoid this sloppy construction."

    He gives an example that does not please him.

    It concerns Australian politics:

    Labor has an edge on unemployment, with the Coalition considered

    better able to handle the environment.

    He suggests that it should read something like:

    Labor has an edge on unemployment; the Coalition is considered

    better able to handle the environment.

    It is only my guess that he might suggest that your sentence read:

    The autonomy emanates from national law; each state determines

    its extent.

    Personally, with all due respect to Mr. Garner, I prefer your

    original sentence.

    I guess the most interesting point is that this use of "with"

    = and.

    That is,

    The autonomy of the organizations emanates from national law,

    and each state determines its extent.

    I think the sentence using "with" is better because it does not give

    equal weight to both parts of the sentence, as does a compound

    sentence with "and." You simply want to tell people that the

    autonomy of the organizations emanates from national law PERIOD

    (Then you add the extra information that each state determines its

    extent. It is something like P.S.)

    ***** NOT A TEACHER *****

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • China

    • Join Date: Apr 2009
    • Posts: 670
    #5

    Re: With

    Parser, you are a walking encyclopaedia! Well done!

    I would simply analyse 'with each state determining its extent.' as an adverbial of manner pointed at 'emanates', 'with' being here a preposition.

    "The autonomy of the organizations emanates from national law, with each state determining its extent."

    The autonomy emanates somehow. (somehow = with each state determining its (own) extent (of emanation of their autonomy).

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • Switzerland

    • Join Date: Aug 2009
    • Posts: 1,676
    #6

    Re: With

    Quote Originally Posted by TheParser View Post
    ***** NOT A TEACHER *****

    (1) I have found some more information.

    (2) The famous grammarian Otto Jespersen (whose first language was

    not English!!!) reminds us that the use of "with" in such sentences

    "means virtually the same thing as having."

    (a) His example:

    She came the whole length of the immense room, with everyone

    looking at her.

    (i) I guess (guess!!!) your sentence could be reworded something like:

    The autonomy emanates from national law, having each state determine its

    extent.

    (3) Our friend Bryan A. Garner seems to be rather unhappy with this kind

    of construction.

    (a) He likes: Jacobson/He being absent, the party was a bore.

    (i) He calls this a nominative absolute. It is not grammatically linked to

    the main sentence. The whole phrase adverbially modifies some verb.

    (I guess he means that the above sentence is a short way to say:

    Because/since Jacobson/He was absent, the party was a bore.)

    (b) He does not like adding "with." He says that "With Jacobson

    absent, the party was a bore" is not a nominative absolute. He calls it

    an "objective absolute," presumably because it is the object of the

    preposition "with." (A real nominative absolute always has the subject

    in the nominative case. His example: He being absent, ...)



    (c) And he really dislikes changing "He being absent...." to the

    possessive "His being absent...."

    (d) He also has this to say about "with."

    (i) "With is increasingly being used as a quasi-conjunction [Is that

    why Professor Quirk chooses to call it a subordinator?] to introduce a tag-

    on idea at the end of the sentence. The sense is close to and." [Very

    interesting!!!]

    He then adds: "Avoid this sloppy construction."

    He gives an example that does not please him.

    It concerns Australian politics:

    Labor has an edge on unemployment, with the Coalition considered

    better able to handle the environment.

    He suggests that it should read something like:

    Labor has an edge on unemployment; the Coalition is considered

    better able to handle the environment.

    It is only my guess that he might suggest that your sentence read:

    The autonomy emanates from national law; each state determines

    its extent.

    Personally, with all due respect to Mr. Garner, I prefer your

    original sentence.

    I guess the most interesting point is that this use of "with"

    = and.

    That is,

    The autonomy of the organizations emanates from national law,

    and each state determines its extent.

    I think the sentence using "with" is better because it does not give

    equal weight to both parts of the sentence, as does a compound

    sentence with "and." You simply want to tell people that the

    autonomy of the organizations emanates from national law PERIOD

    (Then you add the extra information that each state determines its

    extent. It is something like P.S.)

    ***** NOT A TEACHER *****
    I just saw your post. Wow! I'm not sure how to express my gratitude.

    Thanks a thousand times!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •