0

1) With his boss busily working back at the office, Terence continued his stroll down Main Street.

2) Terence continued his stroll down Main Street, his boss busily working back at the office.

Sometimes I see that writers use "with" to start absolute phrase. But I don't know the reason behind that. I think both of my sentencess are correct. But what's is the difference in meaning?

dz420
  • 460
  • There is no difference in meaning. Both sentences sound quite normal for written English, a little formal for spoken English. Actually, dropping the "with" from the first sentence would result in a perfectly comprehensible (if not the best composition possible) sentence as well. – anongoodnurse Nov 02 '16 at 17:23
  • 1
    Here is a relevant previous discussion: http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/322781/how-do-you-explain-the-usage-of-with – Greg Lee Nov 02 '16 at 17:46
  • Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary has: with used as a function word to specify an additional circumstance or condition: We climbed the hill, with Jeff following behind. However, I believe that a degree of reason/explanation is at least connoted here; 'With his boss conveniently on out-of-town business, Terence took an extra half hour over his lunch' shows this more clearly. 'What with ...' shows a stronger link to reason. – Edwin Ashworth Nov 02 '16 at 17:58
  • There's no tangible difference in meaning between the two, though only your second example contains an absolute. An absolute construction is a subordinate clause, not a phrase. But in your first example, the supplement is a preposition phrase and hence not an absolute. In your second example, by contrast, it is a subordinate clause with its own subject and thus does qualify as an absolute. – BillJ Nov 02 '16 at 18:01

0 Answers0