credited with

USAGE SUMMARY

"credited with" is a perfectly acceptable phrase to use in written English.
You can use it when you are acknowledging someone with a particular accomplishment or action. For example, "John is credited with creating the first successful vaccine for eliminating the common cold."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Academia

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

The Mountain West is credited with parity.

The New York Times

It was credited with revitalising Littlehampton.

Independent

Nor was he credited with the assist.

The New York Times - Sports

He was also credited with many miracles.

Encyclopedia Britannica

He was credited with one tackle.

The New York Times - Sports

He is credited with inventing the elevator.

The New York Times

I was credited with bringing rap downtown.

The New Yorker

The Taliban are credited with improving safety.

The New York Times

Luc Robitaille was credited with the goal.

The New York Times - Sports

Young is credited with saving the franchise.

The New York Times - Sports

Justice was credited with a base hit.

The New York Times - Sports

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "credited with", ensure that there is sufficient evidence or reliable sources to support the claim. Avoid making unsubstantiated attributions.

Common error

Avoid using "credited with" without proper verification. Do not attribute actions or achievements to individuals or entities without reliable sources. Misattribution can undermine credibility and accuracy.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "credited with" functions as a verb phrase followed by a preposition, typically used to assign recognition or responsibility for a particular accomplishment, invention, or quality. Ludwig AI confirms its usage across diverse examples.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

40%

Academia

30%

Science

15%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

5%

Wiki

5%

Formal & Business

5%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "credited with" is a commonly used phrase to acknowledge someone's achievements, innovations, or actions. Ludwig AI confirms that it is grammatically correct and appears frequently in news, academic, and scientific writing. When using this phrase, it is essential to ensure that your attribution is accurate and supported by reliable evidence. While alternatives such as "recognized for" and "attributed to" exist, "credited with" is a preferred choice in many formal contexts for its clarity and directness in attributing recognition. Always prioritize accurate and well-sourced attributions to maintain credibility.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

recognized for

Focuses more on public acknowledgment of someone's achievements.

acknowledged for

Similar to 'recognized for' but emphasizes a more formal acknowledgement.

attributed to

Highlights the causal relationship between a person and an outcome.

given credit for

More informal way of saying someone receives acknowledgment.

praised for

Implies a positive evaluation and public commendation.

honored for

Suggests a formal awarding of recognition.

acclaimed for

Emphasizes widespread approval and admiration.

known for

Indicates that someone is generally famous or distinguished by something.

responsible for

Highlights the person's role in causing or achieving something.

associated with

Implies a connection between a person and an action or quality, but less direct attribution.

FAQs

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

Use "credited with" to show that someone or something is recognized for an achievement or action. For instance, "She is "credited with saving" the company from bankruptcy".

What are some alternatives to "credited with"?

You can use alternatives like "recognized for", "known for", or "attributed to" depending on the specific nuance you want to convey.

Is it correct to say "credited for" instead of "credited with"?

While "credited for" might be understood, "credited with" is the standard and grammatically correct phrasing. It is more widely accepted and preferred in formal writing.

What's the difference between "credited with" and "attributed to"?

"Credited with" usually implies recognition and praise for an achievement, while "attributed to" simply indicates a cause or origin, without necessarily implying praise. For example, "The discovery is attributed to her", but "She is credited with the discovery".