foster <with>

Hello everybody,

As I was watching the Merlin Movie, the following sentence attracted my attention:

Arthur had just been born. I fostered him with sir Hector.

My question is that does the usage of the preposition "with" sound normal, natural and idiomatic to you?

By the way, transcript of the movie can be found at Merlin Movie Script.

Thank you!

<Edited by moderator (Florentia52) to eliminate texting abbreviation>

Please give us some context. Who says this line,and in what circumstances?

1. It might mean that I sent him to Sir Hector so that Sir Hector would bring him up as his own child.
2. It might mean that Sir Hector and I agreed to bring him up together.

I can imagine the sentence being said in either sense, though it not a particularly elegant way to express idea 2.

Mnemon said:

I fostered him with sir Hector.

It is a normal sentence. It was common to send noble children to be raised in a different household. That was called "fostering", and this sentence says "I sent him to be raised in sir Hector's household."

In the modern US this is not commonly done, and we use "foster" about orpan children who are raised by other parents. Many couples are "foster parents", raising several orphans and being paid by government orphan child agencies to help with the expenses of raising children. So we say things like:

They were my foster parents.
He was my foster brother.

Thank you very much for your answers.

se16teddy said:

I can imagine the sentence being said in either sense, though it not a particularly elegant way to express idea 2.

The context doesn't imply the second one. 👁 Smile :)

dojibear said:

In the modern US this is not commonly done, and we use "foster" about orpan children who are raised by other parents.

When we say "foster" does it mean that we are talking about taking care of the child just for a particular period of time? Does it imply that it is just an agreement

between families, and the new-parents are not the legal parents of the child?

Thanks!

It is all legal. We are talking about children who have no "family". Their parents died or are in prison or hospitalized, and cannot care for the children. They are not part of any agreements or plans, and are not the legal guardian.

Officially some agency (which may be part of the government, or a private organization) is responsible for each child. It is the "legal guardian". The child may live in an orphanage, but often the agency has agreements with several married couples ("foster parents") who are willing to raise children. Living in a home with 2 parents is considered better than living in an orphanage.

Thank you very much @dojibear .