0
Azz Posted 12 years ago
Grammar

"with" meaning "because of"

Can one say
a. I went to the window and noticed that there was a pleasant breeze blowing outside. With that cool breeze, I felt the urge to go out.

b. I went to the window and noticed that there was a pleasant breeze blowing outside. With that cool breeze blowing over the field, I felt the urge to go out.

?

Here 'with' would mean 'because of'.


Many thanks.
  

Top answer

A weakish kind of "because of", yes. This use of "with" suggests two things happening at the same time, with a certain degree of cause and effect implied, depending on context. This sort of use of "with" can seem a bit loose or vague, sometimes as if the writer couldn't be bothered to think of the proper way to connect two ideas.

— GPY

  • A weakish kind of "because of", yes.
  • This use of "with" suggests two things happening at the same time, with a certain degree of cause and effect implied, depending on context.
  • This sort of use of "with" can seem a bit loose or vague, sometimes as if the writer couldn't be bothered to think of the proper way to connect two ideas.
  • Yours isn't a bad example though.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

3 Answers
0
A weakish kind of "because of", yes. This use of "with" suggests two things happening at the same time, with a certain degree of cause and effect implied, depending on context. This sort of use of "with" can seem a bit loose or vague, sometimes as if the writer couldn't be bothered to think of the proper way to connect two ideas. Yours isn't a bad example though.
0
0
Thank you so much for that clear and precise explanation!

I would like to test two other sentences. Do these sound fine?

c. With his shy smile, she felt the urge to kiss him.
d. She felt the urge to kiss him, with his shy smile.

I would
0
0
Those are both OK. For me they are virtually interchangeable.
0

Related Questions