are still without

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "are still without" is correct and usable in written English. You can use it to indicate that someone or something continues to lack a particular item or condition. Example: "They are still without proper shelter after the storm." Alternative expressions include "are still lacking" and "remain without."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Formal & Business

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

Around 45,000 are still without power.

The Guardian

"We are still without news of him.

The Guardian

But for the Dodgers, the playoffs are still without regret.

The New York Times - Sports

"It is happening but some are still without lights".

The Economist

The small house's windows are still without glass.

The New York Times - Travel

They are still without peer: unique, unfathomably flattering, wondrous.

The Guardian - Books

However, 663 million are still without improved drinking water.

The Guardian

At the present we are still without an atomic bomb.

The New York Times

More than 11,000 French homes are still without electricity.

The Guardian

Many homes are still without power in the area.

The Washington Post

Many survivors of Grenfell Tower are still without permanent accommodation.

The Guardian

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "are still without" to clearly indicate a continuing lack of something, especially when the expectation is that it should be present. For example, "Many homes are still without power after the storm" conveys that the power outage is ongoing and problematic.

Common error

Avoid using "are still without" if the absence is not ongoing or unexpected. For instance, saying "They are still without a car" when they never owned one is incorrect; use "They do not have a car" instead.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "are still without" primarily functions as a verbal phrase indicating a continuing state of lacking something. This aligns with Ludwig AI's assessment of the phrase as correct and usable in various contexts.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

73%

Formal & Business

13%

Science

13%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "are still without" is a versatile and frequently used expression for indicating a continuing lack or absence. As Ludwig AI confirms, its grammar is correct, and it appears most commonly in news and media contexts. When using this phrase, ensure that the lack is ongoing and that it is appropriate for the context. Alternatives like "remain without" or "continue to lack" can provide a more formal tone when needed. Avoid using "are still without" when describing something that was never possessed, as this can lead to confusion.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

continue to lack

Focuses on the continuous state of lacking something.

remain without

Emphasizes the persistence of the absence.

have yet to receive

Highlights that something is expected but has not arrived.

have not yet obtained

Stresses the absence of achievement in acquiring something.

persist in lacking

Highlights the continuous state of deficiency.

are missing

Simply states that something is absent.

do not currently possess

Focuses on the present absence of possession.

are deprived of

Indicates that something essential is being withheld.

are wanting in

Suggests a deficiency in a particular area.

are absent of

Implies a complete lack of something.

FAQs

How can I rephrase "are still without" to sound more formal?

For a more formal tone, consider using phrases like "remain without" or "continue to lack". These alternatives offer a slightly more elevated and professional sound while conveying the same core meaning.

What's a simpler way to say "are still without"?

In casual contexts, you can often replace "are still without" with a simpler phrase like "are missing" or "don't have". For example, "They are missing their keys" is a straightforward alternative to "They are still without their keys".

How does the meaning of "are still without" differ from "used to have"?

"Are still without" indicates a current and ongoing absence, while "used to have" implies a past possession that is no longer the case. The former suggests a lack, potentially unexpected or problematic, while the latter simply states a change in ownership or status.

Is it correct to use "are still without" to describe something that was never possessed?

No, "are still without" is best used when describing an ongoing lack or absence of something that was expected or previously present. If something was never possessed, it's more accurate to say "do not have" or "have never had".