But that's the point, it didn't just explode. It exploded with a deafening bang!With?
The bomb explosion made a bang. I don't remember a proper language term for this, but the bomb just exploded and that's it.
Thanks, panj.With a deafening bang, a bomb inside the underground station exploded.
A bomb inside the underground station exploded with a deafening bang.
With = accompanied by.
I have a feeling that is not really enough of an explanation.
This structure, "With <noun phrase>, statement." is common.
With a song in his heart, he set off to work once again.
With a shrug of his shoulders, he rejected the offer of fame and fortune.
I suppose it is an adverbial construction - the with part modifies the verb in the next part.
It wouldn't always be quite right - for example it seems a little strange to think of "Accompanied by a song in my heart, ..."Thanks, panj.
I think "accompanied by" is a good answer.
I think "with" makes the description/plot vivid.It wouldn't always be quite right - for example it seems a little strange to think of "Accompanied by a song in my heart, ..."
The point, perhaps, is that the with is introducing an adverbial clause that tells us more about how, in this case, the bomb exploded. This structure appears very often in descriptive narrative - certainly the kind of narrative that I read aloud to 7-year-old WMPG. You know the kind of thing, "With a fearsome howl, the wicked wolf jumped out of bed and gobbled up Little Red Riding Hood."