completely devoid of

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase “completely devoid of” is correct and usable in written English.
It is typically used to describe something that is entirely lacking or absent in something else. For example, “The sky was completely devoid of clouds.”.

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

He is completely devoid of conscience.

The New York Times

"She was almost completely devoid of gesture," Ms. Larsen writes.

The New York Times - Books

It was an impressive departure, completely devoid of self-pity.

The Guardian - Sport

Another's game "is completely devoid of all rational thought".

The New York Times - Books

Moreover, the descriptions are almost completely devoid of passion.

Harvard Business Review

"They went from energetic, cheeky, normal kids to completely devoid of all emotion.

The Guardian

That was too easy, and Norwich are looking completely devoid of confidence.

The Guardian - Sport

One senior Tory said: "Michael's great strength is that he is completely devoid of ideology.

The Guardian

It's easy, it's fast, and it's completely devoid of any experiential pleasure.

The New York Times - Style

The presentation was thoroughly unexpected in that it was completely devoid of, well, flashiness.

The Guardian - Opinion

The images in series by Gedney and Mr. Wool are almost completely devoid of human figures.

The New York Times - Arts

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "completely devoid of" to emphasize a total absence, such as "The argument was completely devoid of factual evidence." This highlights the lack of any evidence, rather than just a small amount.

Common error

Avoid using "devoid" as a verb. It is an adjective, so it needs a linking verb like "is", "was", or "are". For example, write "The room is devoid of furniture" instead of "The room devoid of furniture".

Linguistic Context

The phrase "completely devoid of" functions as an adjectival phrase, modifying a noun to indicate a complete absence of something. As Ludwig AI confirms, it is a valid and common construction in English.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

61%

Science

27%

Wiki

5%

Less common in

Formal & Business

3%

Reference

2%

Academia

2%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "completely devoid of" is a grammatically sound and frequently used expression to denote the total absence of something. As Ludwig AI confirms, it functions as an adjectival phrase, typically employed to emphasize a stark lack, as seen in numerous examples from various sources like The New York Times and The Guardian. While suitable for most contexts, its slight formality may make simpler alternatives preferable in casual conversation. Common replacements include phrases like "entirely lacking in" or "totally without". Overall, understanding its nuances helps ensure precise and impactful communication.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

entirely lacking in

Focuses on the absence of something as a characteristic.

totally without

Emphasizes the complete absence of something.

utterly lacking

Stresses the comprehensiveness of the absence.

completely absent of

A more direct synonym, highlighting the lack of presence.

entirely missing

Highlights the absence as a state of being.

absolutely without

Underscores the certainty of the absence.

wholly lacking

Emphasizes the entirety of the absence.

free from

Implies a positive absence, as in being unburdened.

lacking any

Highlights the absence from the perspective of not even having a little bit.

bereft of

More formal, suggesting a sense of loss due to the absence.

FAQs

How can I use "completely devoid of" in a sentence?

Use "completely devoid of" to emphasize the total absence of something. For instance, "The landscape was completely devoid of trees" illustrates that there were no trees at all.

What are some alternatives to "completely devoid of"?

Alternatives include "entirely lacking in", "totally without", or "utterly lacking", all conveying a similar sense of complete absence.

Is it better to say "devoid of" or "without"?

"Devoid of" is more formal and emphasizes a total absence, while "without" is more general. Use "devoid of" when you want to highlight the complete lack of something. For example saying "entirely lacking in" or using "totally without" might be useful in a particular context.

Can "completely devoid of" be used in both formal and informal contexts?

While "completely devoid of" can be used in both formal and informal contexts, it leans towards the formal side. In informal settings, simpler phrases like "totally without" or "entirely missing" might be more appropriate.