be grounds for

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "be grounds for" is correct and usable in written English.
It is typically used to indicate that something provides a reason or justification for a particular action or decision. Example: "The evidence presented in court may be grounds for an appeal."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Academia

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

That ought to be grounds for concern.

The Economist

Wouldn't this be grounds for impeachment?

The Economist

Now that would be grounds for protest.

The Guardian - Opinion

But that shouldn't be grounds for banishment.

The New York Times

But that shouldn't be grounds for deportation".

The New York Times

"It should be grounds for nonconfirmation".

The New York Times - Magazine

Such ratings can be grounds for firing.

The New York Times

Wouldn't that be grounds for a demolition?

The New Yorker

This should be grounds for comfort for everyone.

The New York Times

Such disrespect can be grounds for a bench-clearing brawl.

The New York Times

It does consider deceitful impersonation to be grounds for suspension.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "be grounds for", ensure the connection between the reason and the resulting action or decision is clear and logical. This strengthens the argument or justification you're presenting.

Common error

Avoid using "be grounds for" when the justification is weak or speculative. Overstating the strength of the "grounds" can undermine your credibility. Ensure that the evidence or reason provided genuinely supports the action or conclusion.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "be grounds for" functions as a predicative expression, indicating that something serves as a justification or sufficient reason for a specific action or outcome. Ludwig AI confirms that the phrase is grammatically correct and widely used.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

70%

Academia

15%

Science

10%

Less common in

Wiki

3%

Formal & Business

2%

Encyclopedias

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "be grounds for" is a grammatically sound and frequently used expression indicating that something provides justification or reason. As Ludwig AI confirms, it's prevalent across various domains, especially news, academia, and science. While versatile, remember to ensure a clear and logical connection between the stated grounds and the resulting action. Alternatives like "constitute a reason for" can offer nuance, but "be grounds for" maintains a formal and widely understood presence in English writing.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

constitute a reason for

Emphasizes that something serves as a valid reason or justification.

serve as justification for

Highlights the role of providing a valid defense or explanation.

provide a basis for

Indicates the establishment of a fundamental reason or foundation.

give rise to

Suggests a cause-and-effect relationship, where something leads to a particular outcome.

be cause for

Directly states that something is the reason or origin of a situation or feeling.

warrant

Implies that something makes a particular action or decision appropriate or necessary.

justify

Focuses on the act of proving something to be right or reasonable.

legitimize

Implies making something acceptable or conforming to established rules or standards.

be sufficient reason for

Highlights the adequacy of a reason to support a specific action or belief.

explain

Focuses on providing clarity about an event or situation.

FAQs

How can I use "be grounds for" in a sentence?

The phrase "be grounds for" indicates that something provides a justification or reason for a particular action or decision. For example, "The evidence presented in court may "be grounds for" an appeal".

What can I say instead of "be grounds for"?

You can use alternatives like "constitute a reason for", "serve as justification for", or "provide a basis for" depending on the context.

Which is correct, "be grounds for" or "is ground for"?

"Be grounds for" is generally the correct and more common phrasing. "Is ground for" can sometimes be used, but it's less idiomatic. Sticking to "be grounds for" ensures clearer and more standard English.

What's the difference between "be grounds for" and "be reason for"?

"Be grounds for" typically suggests a more formal or legalistic justification, implying a solid foundation for an action. "Be reason for" is broader and can encompass less formal or emotional justifications. For example, "His behavior might "be reason for" concern", but the legal appeal can "be grounds for" a retrial.