1

During that time, I got way more nervous with I'm in physical contact with him.

What's the thing possibly omitted between with and I'm in? Or if that's grammatical and being seen natural to natives, what am I missing?

  • 1
    The sentence is ungrammatical as written. What's the context? Where have you taken it from? – Gustavson Apr 2 '19 at 22:39
  • @Gustavson Thanks. It's satisfying enough just to know it's ungrammatical. The sentence is from some third-rate novel which was double translated. – dolco Apr 2 '19 at 22:53
2

That sentence is ungrammatical and, at the point of the grammar error, incomprehensible. Absent any context, I would guess with was an error for when, or I'm was an error for being.

I'm not aware of any English dialect in which that would be considered an acceptable sentence.

| improve this answer | |
  • Thanks. It's satisfying enough just to know it's ungrammatical. The sentence is from some third-rate novel which was double translated. – dolco Apr 2 '19 at 22:54
  • Another possibility is that "with" should be replaced by "with when". – Jasper Apr 2 '19 at 22:58
  • @Jasper: That would at least make meaning clear, though I find it unappealingly redundant. I'm sure it's a perfectly natural way to say it for some folks, though. – SamBC Apr 2 '19 at 23:01

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.