the explanation of the question 128 in OG states that:
with cannot be followed by an independent clause
as you can see in the following example:
Australian embryologists have found evidence that suggesting that the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal [b]with[/b] its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel.
Could anyone give an example of a dependent clause which is correct using "with"?
with cannot be followed by an independent clause
as you can see in the following example:
Australian embryologists have found evidence that suggesting that the elephant had descended from an aquatic animal [b]with[/b] its trunk originally evolved as a kind of snorkel.
Could anyone give an example of a dependent clause which is correct using "with"?
