after was

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "after was" is not correct and does not convey a clear meaning in written English.
It may be used in contexts where "after" is intended to indicate a sequence of events, but it typically requires additional context or restructuring to be grammatically correct. Example: "After was the time when we decided to move forward with the project."

⚠ May contain grammatical issues

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

53 human-written examples

The morning after was even more moving.

The New York Times - Sports

Her answer, then and after, was yes.

The Guardian

What these artists were after was novelty.

The New York Times - Arts

There was no significant theatre writing after Was He Anyone?

The Guardian

What the Romantics were after was untamed scenery and wilderness.

The Guardian

What came after was a lot of people plugging automobiles".

The New York Times - Style

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

6 human-written examples

After is always before.

The New Yorker

"And after being weathered.

The New York Times

Brown collapsed after being shot.

The New Yorker

After being a global I.P.O.

The New York Times

Thomas Vermaelen was also withdrawn after being kicked.

Independent

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When describing a sequence of events, prioritize clarity and grammatical accuracy. Instead of using the phrase "after was", consider using phrases like "what followed" or "subsequently happened" to avoid grammatical errors.

Common error

A common mistake is to use "after was" when "what followed" or a similar construction would be grammatically correct. Ensure that the subject of the sentence is clearly defined when describing sequential events.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "after was" often functions as an attempt to connect a time sequence with a subsequent event or state. However, Ludwig AI indicates this construction is generally incorrect, meaning it doesn't adhere to standard grammatical rules. Examples show it trying to link actions to their consequences, but often doing so imprecisely.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

78%

Huffington Post

13%

Vice

9%

Less common in

Encyclopedia Britannica

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Science

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

Although the phrase "after was" appears frequently, Ludwig AI flags it as grammatically incorrect. This construction is often used in an attempt to describe a sequence of events, particularly in news and media, but it lacks grammatical precision. To ensure clarity and correctness, especially in formal writing, consider using alternatives like "what followed", "subsequently happened", or "then occurred". Understanding the grammatical function and intended purpose of the phrase can help you select a more appropriate and accurate way to express sequential relationships.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

subsequently happened

Replaces "after was" with a clearer indication of sequential occurrence.

what followed

Emphasizes the events that came next.

then occurred

Provides a more formal and grammatically sound alternative to indicate sequence.

that ensued

Offers a sophisticated way to describe events that happened immediately after.

came next

Simple and direct way to indicate what happened in sequence.

which followed

Uses a relative clause to specify the next event.

what transpired next

Formal and descriptive, suitable for narrative or report writing.

next in sequence

Clearly indicates order, often used in instructional or procedural contexts.

that came after

More descriptive and emphasizes the relationship between events.

the aftermath

Highlights the period or consequences following an event.

FAQs

How can I correctly use a phrase indicating sequence instead of "after was"?

Instead of "after was", you can use phrases such as "what followed", "subsequently happened", or "then occurred" for clarity and grammatical correctness.

What are some alternatives to "after was" in formal writing?

In formal contexts, opt for alternatives like "that ensued", "what transpired next", or "which followed" to maintain a professional tone.

Is "after was" grammatically correct?

Generally, "after was" is considered grammatically incorrect in standard English. It's better to use more precise and grammatically sound alternatives to convey the intended meaning.

How does "the aftermath" differ from "after was"?

"The aftermath" refers to the period or consequences following a significant event. While it relates to what comes after, it's used to describe a state or situation rather than a direct sequence of events, unlike the intended use of "after was".