do not invalidate

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "do not invalidate" is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it when instructing someone not to nullify or discredit something, such as an argument, opinion, or piece of information. Example: "Please do not invalidate my concerns without considering the evidence I have presented."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

News & Media

Academia

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

Indirect effects upon interstate commerce do not invalidate the act.

Cornell University

Leaks do not invalidate government secrecy; they depend upon it.

The New Yorker

They do not invalidate the principle that the acquisition of territory by conquest is inadmissible.

The Economist

The criticisms of the last few decades do not invalidate its usefulness, if used with due critical judgement.

Encyclopedia of Archaeology

THE facts quoted by Dr. Dartnall do not invalidate our conclusions.

Nature

It is worth noting that these findings do not invalidate forensic evidence.

The Guardian

These two issues certainly do not invalidate the Green Deal in principle.

The Guardian

Rewilding Europe points out that its findings do not invalidate concerns about the global loss of biodiversity.

The Guardian

Single errors by Davies and Hyde amid a host of truths do not invalidate the Guardian's terrific overall work.

The Guardian

Of course, the penumbra of thoughts and feelings that form around secrecy do not invalidate the rational goal of hiding some government activities where needed.

The New Yorker

Low inflation-indexed yields and high short-term volatility of inflation-indexed bond returns do not invalidate the basic case for these bonds, that they provide a safe asset for long-term investors.

Yale University

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "do not invalidate" when acknowledging potential weaknesses or limitations in an argument or finding, while still asserting its overall value or relevance. This shows critical thinking and nuanced understanding.

Common error

Avoid using "do not invalidate" to dismiss genuine, significant flaws. It's crucial to differentiate between minor limitations that can be acknowledged and substantial problems that truly undermine the validity of a claim.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "do not invalidate" primarily functions as a qualifier or a hedge. It is used to concede potential limitations or criticisms while maintaining the overall validity or relevance of a statement, argument, or finding. Ludwig AI indicates that this phrase is grammatically sound and readily used in various contexts.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

Science

61%

News & Media

25%

Academia

10%

Less common in

Formal & Business

3%

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "do not invalidate" is a grammatically correct and frequently used expression, as confirmed by Ludwig AI. It serves to acknowledge potential limitations without undermining the overall validity of a statement or finding. Common in scientific, academic, and news contexts, it provides a balanced perspective by addressing concerns while reinforcing the central message. When using this phrase, it's important to distinguish between minor limitations and substantial flaws. Alternatives include "does not negate" and "does not undermine", offering similar but slightly different nuances. "Do not invalidate" is useful for demonstrating critical thinking and nuanced understanding.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

does not negate

Focuses on a direct contradiction or nullification, whereas "do not invalidate" allows for potential flaws.

does not undermine

Emphasizes a weakening effect rather than a complete destruction of validity.

does not discredit

Highlights the preservation of reputation or believability.

does not nullify

Indicates that something remains in effect, despite challenges.

does not negate

Centers on a direct contradiction or denial, emphasizing a clear opposition.

does not disprove

Focuses on the lack of evidence to show something is false, implying a lesser degree of challenge than "invalidate".

does not diminish

Suggests a lessening of value or importance rather than a complete invalidation.

does not compromise

Highlights the maintenance of integrity or functionality, even with limitations.

does not detract from

Focuses on a reduction in positive qualities rather than a complete loss of validity.

does not override

Refers to something not taking precedence or canceling something else out.

FAQs

How can I use "do not invalidate" in a sentence?

You can use "do not invalidate" to express that certain limitations or criticisms do not negate the overall value or correctness of something. For example, "These concerns "do not invalidate" the main findings of the study."

What's a more formal alternative to "do not invalidate"?

A more formal alternative could be "does not negate" or "does not undermine". For instance, instead of saying "The small sample size "do not invalidate" the results" you could say "The small sample size "does not negate" the results."

When is it appropriate to use "do not invalidate"?

It's appropriate to use "do not invalidate" when you want to concede certain weaknesses or acknowledge limitations, but still maintain that the core argument or findings remain sound and relevant. It suggests a balanced and nuanced perspective.

Is there a difference between "do not invalidate" and "do not disprove"?

Yes, "do not invalidate" means something is not completely without value or effect, even if imperfect. "Do not disprove" simply means there's no definitive evidence to show something is false. Something can be not disproven yet still invalid in some contexts, and vice versa.