me in tow behind

[Maybo]

He shuffled down the hall, me in tow behind, looking at his bony legs and taking small steps so as not to bump up on him. (Have a Little Faith by Mitch Albom)

Is "with" or "and" omitted before "me"?

 

[GoesStation]

Nothing is omitted, but "with" could be added with no change in meaning. "And" wouldn't work. Can you see why not?

 

[Maybo]

"And" wouldn't work. Can you see why not?

Is it because "me in tow behind" is not a sentence?

 

[GoesStation]

Is it because "me in tow behind" is not a sentence?

No. There's nothing for "and" to relate to. This sentence works: He shuffled down the hall, Kate's hand in his and me in tow behind. It has two ideas joined by and.

 

[Maybo]

Can I remove the first comma in the sentence? If I remove it, do I need to add "with"?

 

[jutfrank]

You can, yes, but you'd obviously lose the effect that the comma has.

Yes, you do need to add with if you remove the comma.

 

[Maybo]

Why isn't it "I in tow behind"?

 

[GoesStation]

He shuffled down the hall, me in tow behind, looking at his bony legs and taking small steps so as not to bump up on him. (Have a Little Faith by Mitch Albom)

Is "with" or "and" omitted before "me"?

Why isn't it "I in tow behind"?

You answered the question in post #1: "with" is omitted. "Me" is, if I'm expressing this correctly, the object of the implied preposition.