3

Can I change the first sentence to the following sentence?

1) The cells were treated with enzyme A. -> The enzyme A was treated to the cells.

2) The protein was adsorbed to the nanoparticle. -> The nanoparticle was adsorbed with the protein.

  • 1
    @Tory see my comment below re "adsorbed" and "absorbed" – D. Nelson Dec 7 '16 at 19:06
9

The original sentences are correct, you should use those.

"treat to" means to give something as a gift or pay for something on someone else's behalf, e.g. "I'll treat you to dinner tonight". So "The enzyme A was treated to the cells" makes it sound like someone bought enzyme A some cells as a present.

"adsorb" means "to cause a substance, usually a gas, to form a very thin layer on the surface of another substance". So on, to or onto are the prepositions you could use. "adsorbed with" doesn't make any sense.

  • 2
    Per this NGram, the most common preposition after adsorbed is actually on. But to sounds fine to me anyway (and I quite agree that with doesn't cut the mustard here). – FumbleFingers Dec 7 '16 at 14:38
  • 1
    Good spot, I'll edit my answer to include "on" – D. Nelson Dec 7 '16 at 14:41
  • @FumbleFingers I'll raise your NGram with another NGram, "absorbed by" and "absorbed into" for a passive voice. – Tory Dec 7 '16 at 18:40
  • 1
    @Tory: Good point. But I'll see your "passive" and raise you an explicitly active voice chart by searching for which adsorbed xxx - if I'm not mistaken, that should screen out all passive usages (which unsurprisingly tend to favour by). – FumbleFingers Dec 7 '16 at 18:48
  • 1
    @Tory I think you've got "absorbed" and "adsorbed" confused :) – D. Nelson Dec 7 '16 at 19:05

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.