permeate: to flow or spread through...
2007-03-11 09:40:25 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Education & Reference ➔ Words & Wordplay
it would have to be the water permeated the tubes because the word through is already in the definition and you don't need to repeat it.
2007-03-11 09:43:24 · answer #1 · answered by claire k 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If the permeation was caused through a tubular structure then the water permeated through the tubes is correct.
If you are wanting water to go from one end of a tube to another end then you would not use permeated. You would use 'the water flowed through', 'gushed through', 'streamed through', 'ran through' the tubes.
If you want the water to saturate the tubular structure to make that tubular structure stiff with rigor you could say that the water permeated the tubes implying that the water was coming into the tubes and filling the tubes.
Permeate will mean a filling of a space. Flowing from one space to another space to fill it.
2007-03-11 16:53:23 · answer #2 · answered by geeketta 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Neither is particularly good, but unless the tubes were perforated (i.e. had holes along their length), the water could only permeate through the tube. A better sentence would be the water flowed through the tubes, so unless you must use the word "permeated," change it to "flowed" or change the sentence, e.g.
The smell of cooked cabbage permeated the room.
The fragrance of her perfume permeated the room.
2007-03-11 16:46:44 · answer #3 · answered by Lillian L 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The water permeated the tubes.
2007-03-11 16:46:21 · answer #4 · answered by J Leigh ♥ 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The water permeated the tubes. The other sentence is kind of redundant.
2007-03-11 16:44:55 · answer #5 · answered by Goodmomma1 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The water premeated the tubes. Through the tubes is redundant.
2007-03-11 16:44:38 · answer #6 · answered by contrary mary 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They both could be depending on if water came though the tubes.
2007-03-11 16:44:14 · answer #7 · answered by Old guy 124 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋