[Grammar] Questions about grammar

[Cap1034]

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]

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.

 

[Cap1034]

Sorry about the title.

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

 

[SoothingDave]

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.

 

[Cap1034]

However, what about this?

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

 

[SoothingDave]

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.

 

[Cap1034]

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]

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.

 

[Cap1034]

Thank you very much.