I keep hearing this phrase in the end of news release on the radio:
Thanks for listening. I am Mike Widword along with Lizz Cai
meaning that two anchors were involved in casting this news. I wonder why not say "together with Lizz Cai"?
|
I keep hearing this phrase in the end of news release on the radio:
meaning that two anchors were involved in casting this news. I wonder why not say "together with Lizz Cai"? |
|||
|
|
|
In your example I think it would be better just to say:
Which makes perfect sense. Along with and together with don't have too much of a different meaning. Although along with sort of implies a dependance on the two subjects. For example: You are at a private party and you were only able to get in because Sally is a member you were her guest. Now someone asks you:
You could respond:
Which sort of implies that Sally is the reason you were able to get in. This makes more sense than:
Which means the same thing but sort of implies the fact that you came with her is not important to the answer. But if you want to use together it would be better to say:
And of course there is nothing wrong with:
|
|||
|
|
|
Both seem perfectly fine to use interchangeably. It is the context in which you use them that matters, if at all. Like, I'd say "along with" when I refer to a person(s) and 'together with' for things; for teams/groups i use both as it fits. However, at times, 'together with' can be used while referring to people; for example - "I was able to crack the code together with my partner." Here, 'along with' doesn't seem correct. |
|||||
|