been signed for both

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "been signed for both" is not correct in standard written English.
It may be intended to convey that something has been signed on behalf of two parties, but it lacks clarity and proper structure. Example: "The documents have been signed for both parties involved in the agreement."

⚠ May contain grammatical issues

News & Media

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

1 human-written examples

He said letters of intent had been signed for both.

The New York Times

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

57 human-written examples

Julia Roberts has been signed, for significantly more than $8 million.

The New York Times

A lease has already been signed for the office.

The New York Times

(The hardcover book was signed for us by both of them).

Huffington Post

Both Fey and Baldwin are signed for Season 7, if NBC renews the long-running comedy.

Huffington Post

Jeter is signed for three more years, Rodriguez for six.

The New York Times - Sports

He was signed for £4million from Inter Milan in 1999.

Independent

If they accept, they are signed for next season.

The New York Times - Sports

Cliff Floyd is signed for three more years.

The New York Times - Sports

Bayer Leverkusen's Lars Bender could not be signed for £18.5m.

The Guardian - Sport

Vander Wal is signed for next season at $1.8 million.

The New York Times - Sports

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Instead of using "been signed for both", clarify your sentence by specifying who signed what, or who the signing was on behalf of. This improves clarity and avoids grammatical ambiguity.

Common error

Avoid passive constructions like "been signed for both" because it obscures who performed the signing action. Actively state who signed and for whom, making the sentence clearer and more informative.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "been signed for both" functions as a passive construction aiming to indicate that a signing action has been completed concerning two entities. However, as noted by Ludwig, it lacks clarity and structural correctness, which raises potential ambiguity.

Expression frequency: Rare

Frequent in

News & Media

33%

Science

33%

Formal & Business

0%

Less common in

Academia

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "been signed for both" is grammatically questionable and may lead to misunderstanding. Ludwig AI analysis indicates that it deviates from standard written English, recommending alternatives such as "signed on behalf of both" or "signed for both parties" for improved clarity. While occasionally found in News & Media and Science contexts, its informal register and potential ambiguity make it less suitable for formal writing. When aiming for precision, clearly specify who signed and what they signed for.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

signed for both parties

States who the signing was done for.

signed on behalf of both

Specifies that the signing action was performed as a representative of both entities.

endorsed by both

Indicates approval or support from both parties involved.

agreed upon by both

Highlights that the agreement was reached with the consent of both sides.

ratified by both

Implies a formal approval or confirmation by both entities.

contracts signed by both parties

More explicitly states that contracts were signed.

approved by both

Shows that approval was obtained by both entities.

authorized by both

Indicates permission has been granted.

validated by both

Expresses that the action has been proved.

sanctioned by both

Implies a formal endorsement and approval.

FAQs

What does "been signed for both" mean?

The phrase "been signed for both" typically suggests that something has been signed on behalf of two parties or items. However, it's often better to clarify the agent of the action.

How can I use "been signed for both" correctly in a sentence?

While not grammatically standard, you could rephrase to say "The documents have "been signed" for both parties involved" or "signed on behalf of both".

What is a more grammatically correct alternative to "been signed for both"?

Better alternatives include "signed for both parties", "signed on behalf of both", or specifying who signed the document, such as "Both parties signed the agreement".

In what contexts is "been signed for both" most likely to appear?

Given its grammatical ambiguity, "been signed for both" is unlikely to appear in formal writing. You might encounter it in informal conversation or less carefully edited content.