replaced with or replaced by (2025)

is there any difference between saying " this person was replaced with other person" and " this person was replaced by other person".

Also I want to know if saying " to replace him by other person is correct" and why?

Your second example isn't correct.
Regarding 'with' and 'by', in the sense that A replaces B, they mean the same thing but the more common version is with by, and not with. It is also possible to understand that the other person made the decision to replace the first, and we're not told who by.

Adam was replaced with Bill.
Adam was replaced by Bill (both have same meaning; Adam goes and Bill comes in).

Adam was replaced by Bill (this can have the meaning that Bill decided that Adam had to be replaced, but the sentence doesn't say who Bill picked to replace Adam).

If you are referring to replacing something that is broken, old, or not working/inoperative, then you replace it with a new one.

If you are referring to filling the role of someone or something with a substitute, then it is 'replaced by'.
"Human bank tellers have all but been replaced by ATMs."
Humans were not 'faulty', but ATMs were a cheaper substitute for one of the main duties of a teller; and more efficient, since they 'work' 24/7 and don't demand overtime!

ATM: automatic teller machines - a 'flexiteller' in Australia.

"With" is used, when the subject of the sentence is the one that performs the action of replacement. For example: John (subject) replaced the old car with a new one. Here, the subject is "John"; hence, the preposition WITH is used between the two nouns (the new car and the old car) involved in the replacement.

On the other hand, if the subject/the focus of the sentence is the one that was replaced, the preposition "by" should be used. For example: The old car was replaced by the new one. Note that such sentences/ phrases are always in passive voice.

Considering all posts above, I see that the "replacing a broken part" meaning may conflict with the passive voice usage. How do I say "I replaced the broken lamp with a new one" in passive voice?

The broken lamp was replaced with a new one.
OR
The broken lamp was replaced by a new one.
?

I guess that the latter is the correct one.

Alan Evangelista said:

Considering all posts above, I see that the "replacing a broken part" meaning may conflict with the passive voice usage. How do I say "I replaced the broken lamp with a new one" in passive voice?

The broken lamp was replaced with a new one.
OR
The broken lamp was replaced by a new one.
?

I guess that the latter is the correct one.

Click to expand...

I don't know why you want to use passive voice here, but "with" makes more sense to me in this sentence.

I should also add that, depending on context, "Adam was replaced by Bill" could mean that Bill replaced Adam with someone or something else.

Forero said:

I don't know why you want to use passive voice here, but "with" makes more sense to me in this sentence

Click to expand...

Thanks for the answer!

I would want to use the passive voice for one of the same two reasons I use passive voice anywhere: to increase the focus on the object of the action (and thus reduce it on the subject). By the way, the second reason to use passive voice is to avoid expliciting the sentence subject, but it obvious does not apply to my examples.

I understand the active voice is more used with "replace with" and passive voice is more used with "replace by", I just wanted to understand better the available options here.

I was answering an IELTS map question and I'm confused between 'replaced by' and 'replaced with.'
"This playground will be replaced by/with a theater."

I wrote 'replaced with' but the answer says 'replaced by.' Just so you know it's an American site magoosh.com

Alan Evangelista said:

Considering all posts above, I see that the "replacing a broken part" meaning may conflict with the passive voice usage. How do I say "I replaced the broken lamp with a new one" in passive voice?

The broken lamp was replaced with a new one.
OR
The broken lamp was replaced by a new one.
?

I guess that the latter is the correct one.

Click to expand...

The broken lamp was replaced with a new one (by me)

Hi to all,
We use "by" With noun so ans will be a broken lamp was replaced with the new one by him.
Means lamp was replaced with the new one bt who replaced it will be the person or noun who follows ''by''.

Defective tab was replaced with a brand new laptop by our employer.

I hope this helps!

I

It's important to avoid confusing the reader. You're right, Gurjeetk, that when we use the passive we need the pattern:
X was replaced with Y by Z.

We replaced the workers with robots.
The workers were replaced with robots.

The playground will be replaced with/by a theatre. I think you can use either. Obviously a theatre cannot be responsible for replacing the playground, so the meaning is clear.

The playground will be replaced with a theatre by the town council.

Hi all,

I am often reviewing translations from English to French, and every time I want to tell the project manager to change a word for a new one, I don’t know whether I should say:
Could you replace avis by remarque or Could you replace avis with remarque

I always go with by, I don’t know why, it sounds more natural to me, but there is always this little question in my head wondering whether it shouldn’t be with.
Could someone tell me what’s the most idiomatic way of saying it and why?

Thanks!

As a broad generalisation: by a person; with a thing.

This applies to any verb, replace, hit, see, love, whatever... Thus:

• He was replaced by his boss with a computer.
• He was hit by a boy with a cricket bat.
• He was seen by the sailors with a telescope.
• He was loved by his mother with a blind passion.

Is this a rule? NO, but it usually works.