Used and loved by millions

Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak quote

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak

CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com

MitStanfordHarvardAustralian Nationa UniversityNanyangOxford

collapsed with

Grammar usage guide and real-world examples

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "collapsed with" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to describe a situation where someone or something has fallen down or failed due to a specific cause or condition. Example: "After the intense pressure of the deadline, she collapsed with exhaustion."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Encyclopedias

Wiki

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

Meaning collapsed with the towers.

News & Media

The New York Times

It collapsed with debts of about £300m.

News & Media

Independent

He collapsed with exhaustion afterward.

News & Media

The New York Times

The family's fortunes collapsed with the Depression.

The boom collapsed with the electric light.

News & Media

The New Yorker

These schemes collapsed with the economy in 2008.

News & Media

The New York Times

This man collapsed with heart attack in front of us.

News & Media

Independent

Three days later, the junta collapsed with barely a fight.

News & Media

The New York Times

It collapsed with his arrest on Dec. 11, 2008.

News & Media

The New York Times

When the final whistle went, they almost collapsed with exhaustion.

The company collapsed with debts of $300m in 2001.

Show more...

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "collapsed with", ensure that the context clearly indicates what caused the collapse, whether it's a physical structure, an emotional state, or an abstract concept. This will help avoid ambiguity and make your writing more precise.

Common error

Avoid using "collapsed with" when a simple 'collapsed' suffices. The 'with' should introduce a specific cause or condition directly linked to the collapse. For example, say 'The building collapsed' instead of 'The building collapsed with gravity' if the cause is self-evident. Saying 'The building collapsed with structural fatigue' is correct.

Antonio Rotolo, PhD - Digital Humanist | Computational Linguist | CEO @Ludwig.guru

Antonio Rotolo, PhD

Digital Humanist | Computational Linguist | CEO @Ludwig.guru

Source & Trust

84%

Authority and reliability

4.5/5

Expert rating

Real-world application tested

Linguistic Context

The phrase "collapsed with" functions as a verb phrase indicating a state of failing, breaking down, or giving way due to a specific cause or condition. Ludwig AI confirms this usage across various contexts.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

75%

Wiki

10%

Science

8%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

5%

Formal & Business

2%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "collapsed with" is a grammatically correct and commonly used verb phrase to indicate failure or breakdown due to a specific cause. Ludwig AI confirms this, showcasing its presence in news, science, encyclopedias, and wiki sources, indicating a neutral register. When using "collapsed with", ensure clarity about the cause of the collapse to avoid ambiguity. Related phrases include "succumbed to" and "gave way under". It's important to use 'with' to specify a direct cause; otherwise, 'collapsed' alone may suffice. The phrase is frequently used in News & Media, Wiki, and Science contexts.

FAQs

How can I use "collapsed with" in a sentence?

You can use "collapsed with" to describe a structure, system, or person that has fallen down or failed because of something specific. For example, "The old bridge "collapsed with" the added weight of the truck" or "She "collapsed with" exhaustion after the marathon".

What are some alternatives to the phrase "collapsed with"?

Depending on the context, you could use phrases like "succumbed to", "gave way under", or "crumbled under". The best choice depends on whether you're describing a physical collapse or a metaphorical one.

Is it always necessary to include 'with' when describing something that collapsed?

No, it isn't. Using just "collapsed" is often sufficient, especially when the cause is obvious or implied. Adding "with" is appropriate when you want to explicitly state the reason for the collapse, such as ""collapsed with" the impact".

What's the difference between ""collapsed with"" and "collapsed under"?

"Collapsed with" usually implies a direct result or immediate cause, whereas "collapsed under" often suggests a prolonged or accumulated pressure. For example, "The roof "collapsed with" the weight of the snow" versus "The government collapsed under the weight of corruption".

ChatGPT power + Grammarly precisionChatGPT power + Grammarly precision
ChatGPT + Grammarly

Editing plus AI, all in one place.

Stop switching between tools. Your AI writing partner for everything—polishing proposals, crafting emails, finding the right tone.

Source & Trust

84%

Authority and reliability

4.5/5

Expert rating

Real-world application tested

Most frequent sentences: