"appointed to" vs "appointed with"

Question

"appointed to" vs "appointed with"

Both "appointed with" and "appointed to" are commonly used phrases in English, but they have different meanings and contexts. "Appointed with" is used when referring to being furnished or equipped with something, while "appointed to" is used when referring to being assigned a position or task.

Last Updated: March 31, 2024

This phrase is used when referring to being assigned a position or task. For example, "She was appointed to the position of manager."

Examples:

He was appointed to the board of directors.
She was appointed to lead the project.
They were appointed to serve on the committee.

Alternatives:

assigned to
designated to
nominated to

This phrase is used when referring to being furnished or equipped with something. For example, "The room was appointed with elegant furniture."

Examples:

The house was appointed with modern appliances.
The office was appointed with state-of-the-art technology.
The restaurant was appointed with luxurious decor.

Alternatives:

furnished with
equipped with
decorated with

Answer 1

appointed to

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

Answer 2

appointed with

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

"appointed to" vs "appointed with"

appointed to

appointed with

Related Comparisons