The words 'together with', 'along with', 'as well as' and

Mohan, to my understanding, all the three i.e. along with, together with, and as well as have similar treatment in grammar.

With the presence of either of these in a sentence, the verb takes colour from the subject like in the initial example - Eric along with Emiley is going for a walk, here 'is' is used because Eric is singular. Instead of 'along with' even if ' together with' or 'as well as' was used in the sentence, we would have used 'is'.
Only 'and' in a sentence is capable of combining the subject and making it plural.

Hope this helps !

Kyle, please correct me in case there's any disconnect.

@Mohan

Pay attention to the following;

Jack along with his friends is going to the camp.
Teachers along with the principal are going to the camp.

I like Chinese food as well as South-Indian meals .

together,altogether,together with are common in use with subtle usage differences.

Rozy and shena are going together.
The new machine can wash vegetables and chop them altogether.
Jenet is not willing to go to the movie together with any of her colleague.

Hope this helps !

An easier way to understand is to see what the focus of the sentence is.
Suppose you have two main subjects say The prime minister and his secretary and they both went for a meeting.
Would you say " The Prime minister and his undersecretary went for the meeting ?
or The prime minister along with his undersecretary went for the meeting.
Obv the Second one because the priminister is the focus of the sentence it. and that is the reason we use Together with, along with because we want he focus to be on one of the subjects. The use of and accords equal importance to both of the subjects where as the use of together with and along with tells us that the first one is the main subject we are talking about. and hence singular.

Hello,

The explanation of option (B) of question 201 of GMAT Official Advanced Questions, reads as follows:

"... The first boldfaced portion is not a conclusion; it is merely an assertion that is not supported by any claims presented in the argument. This portion, along with the statement immediately following it, ARE offered in support of the second boldfaced portion..."

I understand that this is an explanation for a CR question, however it's inconsistent with the rule used in SC. Could some one please have a look at this? Thank you.

sorry this is so funny hahaha