How about some liquid linguist?

Consider:

• Would you like some cake with cream? (1)
• Would you like some cake with me? (2)

The first sentence asks someone if they would like cake that has cream poured over it; but the second one – despite the apparent structural similarity – does not ask someone if they want cake with me poured over it. Syntactically, the sentences are different: in the first one, “with cream” describes the cake, so that we have “Would you like some cake with cream [on it]?”. In the second one, “with me” does not describe the cake, but goes with the verb itself: “Would you like some cake, along with me?” So how do we tell the difference? Is it just the fact that sentence 2 refers to something human (animate), and we immediately dismiss the idea of liquefying me and drizzling me over the cake as absurd/impractical/evil?

Well, consider this:

• Would you like to get in the pool with Doreen? (3)

This could mean either:

• There are several pools – would you like to get in the one that Doreen is in? (A)
• There is one pool – would you like to get in it along with Doreen? (B)

Thus, the same sentence can have two syntactic structures. Sentence 3 can be interpreted as either A or B, where A has the same structure as sentence 1 (“the pool with Doreen” is one unit) and B has the same structure as sentence 2 (where “with Doreen” goes with the verb). So, the structure of sentence 1 is not just restricted to inanimate things.

Consider also:

• Is the trumpet playing the tune with the flute?

This sentence could also have both structures:

• There are lots of tunes under consideration – is the trumpet playing the one that has the flute in it?
• There is one tune here – is the trumpet playing it along with the flute?

This shows that the pattern of sentence 2 is also not restricted to animate things. Ultimately, it must be context that allows us to distinguish between the two possible patterns. Context deficiency would result in ambiguity.