carrying the caffeine with it.

[keannu]

1. What is the usage of "with" here? A method like "I cut the meat with a knife" or "being accompanied" like "I live with my daughter"? It's ambiguous.
I have also seen similiar expression like "I have the purse with me", where "with me" sounds redundant. I don't know why they use "with me", is it for emphasis?

2. What do you think is the usage of "to be sold"? a purpose or a result? It also sounds ambiguous.

rp110)...Every process of decaffeination, whether chemical- or water-based, starts with steaming the green beans to loosen the bonds of caffeine. In the chemical process, a solvent circulates through the beans. The solvent comes into direct contact with them, carrying the caffeine with it. The drained solvent is then mixed with water, and the caffeine is drawn out to be sold....

[emsr2d2]

1. What is the usage of "with" here? A method like "I cut the meat with a knife" or "being accompanied" like "I live with my daughter"? It's ambiguous.
I have also seen similiar expression like "I have the purse with me", where "with me" sounds redundant. I don't know why they use "with me", is it for emphasis?

2. What do you think is the usage of "to be sold"? a purpose or a result? It also sounds ambiguous.

rp110)...Every process of decaffeination, whether chemical- or water-based, starts with steaming the green beans to loosen the bonds of caffeine. In the chemical process, a solvent circulates through the beans. The solvent comes into direct contact with them, carrying the caffeine with it. The drained solvent is then mixed with water, and the caffeine is drawn out to be sold....

It's more like "being accompanied by". The solvent goes around the beans and collects the caffeine as it passes each bean. When the solvent leaves the bean, it has become solvent and caffeine.

I think that the caffeine from the decaffeination process is sold as a by-product, so it's a result.

The purpose of decaffeination is to get tea/coffee with no caffeine, not to produce caffeine.

[keannu]

Thanks for your great explanation, can you also explain this?

...I have also seen similiar expression like "I have the purse with me", where "with me" sounds redundant. I don't know why they use "with me", is it for emphasis?

[emsr2d2]

Thanks for your great explanation, can you also explain this?

...I have also seen similiar expression like "I have the purse with me", where "with me" sounds redundant. I don't know why they use "with me", is it for emphasis?

I suppose it's redundant. I'd never considered it. "Do you have your purse with you?" is effectively the same as "Do you have your purse?" I guess there might be a situation where someone has, for example, brought their purse from their house to a car but when they get out of the car in another location, they might have left the purse in the car. The question might be designed to elicit whether or not the person had remembered not just to bring the purse from home, but also whether or not it is physically on their person right now.