Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!bcstec!charlotte!usenet
From: rwojcik@atc.boeing.com (Richard Wojcik)
Subject: Re: English: Is "...met..." or "...met with..." gramatically cor
Message-ID: <DCt36E.IK1@grace.rt.cs.boeing.com>
Sender: usenet@grace.rt.cs.boeing.com
Reply-To: rwojcik@atc.boeing.com
Organization: Research & Technology
References: <3vlmsc$f53@ss1.cam.nist.gov>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 21:47:01 GMT
Lines: 14


I agree with those who say that "met..." is different from "met with..."  The use
of the preposition "with" implies that you conducted a meeting.  The meaning of
"met..." without 'with' is vague about whether the incident counted as a session
of some sort.  Compare the differences with adverbs:

   Jack met with Jill all day long.
   Jack met Jill all day long.

It seems to me that the first sentence can refer to just a single event, whereas
the second sentence can only be interpreted in an iterative sense:  Jack kept
running into Jill throughout the day.  It is difficult (for me, at least) to construe
it as a single sustained meeting.

