The impossible challenege

Having looked everywhere, Rudolpho eventually resorted to asking James if he could help find his bat.

This could be interpreted as Rudolfo asking James to help find James's bat. So it doesn't work.

I disagree.

Your statement does not specify who's bat Rudolfo is searching for, and therefore it could either be James's bat or Rudolfo's bat. That makes two separate ways to interpret the statement and therefore doesn't work within the parameters that were set.

Though Rodolpho was at odds with James, he had no choice but to ask him to help find his bat, since he was the next batter up.

Still doesn't tell us whose bat.

In this statement, even though they are at odds with each other, they could still be good friends. Even if they were at a disagreement about something so important that it hindered their friendship, it does not have to be interpreted that way. We do not know what they were disagreeing about, and using that we can think that they disagreed about something that was not that important. With that interpretation Rudolfo could of felt the pressure to help his friend out and try to find his bat for him. Not being able to find it, he asked James to help as well. Or another way to interpret it would be that James did not want to search for his bat, but Rudolfo thought that James should look for it too, thus causing them to be at odds with each other. Rudolfo gives in and looks for James's bat. Finding nothing, he has no choice but to ask James to help. There are a multitude of ways to interpret this, and thus it does not work.

It seems clear to me. I'd like to see a vote as to whether it is clear whose bat is being referred to.

It does not matter if it is clear or not, the only thing that matters is that there can only be one way to interpret it.

And of course the interpretation has to accurately represent what the original sentence was trying to say.

Being superstitious concerning which bat he used, and being the next batter up, Rodolpho asked James to help find his bat.

Let's say Rudolfo liked to do things in a very strange manner. Rudolfo plans to find James's bat, using James's help, thereby leaving behind Rudolfo's bat. Sure, in this interpretation his end goal is to get his bat, however, it does not matter, because we can view "find his bat" as the entire process of eliminating James's bat to get Rudolfo's bat, or we can view "find his bat" as just the process of finding James's bat. This creates more than one way to interpret the statement, and therefore does not work.

Being superstitious concerning which bat he used, and being the next batter up, Rodolpho asked James to help find his bat.

I believe that anyone who reads my sentence will understand exactly whose bat is being referred to. There is no ambiguity. The beginning of my sentence is the giveaway.

Rodolpho is the next batter up, not James. Rodolpho is superstitious, not James. There can be no doubt about whose bat Rodolpho is asking James to help find.

Maybe not from a practical perspective, but as i previously stated, whether the meaning is clear or not to someone who reads it does not matter. The only thing that matters is that there is only one way to INTERPRET the statement, and that the statement accurately represents what the original sentence was trying to say.

Being superstitious concerning which bat he used, and being the next batter up, Rodolpho asked James to help find his bat.

Rodolpho is the next batter up. Whose bat do you imagine he is asking James to help find? It's a no-brainer.

I know. However there are different POSSIBILITIES, however unlikely they maybe, they do exist. And because of that it doesn't work. Also in the counter example i gave, Rudolfo used finding James's bat as a step in the process of getting his own bat, and since it was never specified if the statement was referring to that step or the whole picture, it could be either one. Multiple interpretations. Doesn't work.

Being superstitious concerning which bat he used, and being the next batter up, Rodolpho asked James to help find his bat.

It couldn't be more clear. I believe that you are reaching for straws here when you claim that my sentence is open to interpretation when it comes to whose bat needs to be looked for. Nevertheless, it was challenging, and I appreciate such things. But we will have to agree to disagree.

I would like to see a vote on whether people think it can be considered open to interpretation.

Rudolfo couldn't find his own bat, and asked James to help look for it.