earmark on

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "earmark on" is not correct and usable in written English.
The correct expression is "earmark for," which is used to designate something for a specific purpose or use. Example: "The committee decided to earmark funds for the new community center project."

⚠ May contain grammatical issues

News & Media

Science

Wiki

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

4 human-written examples

The Congressional earmark on abstinence funding was needed to correct an overemphasis on condoms, he said.

The New York Times

Senator Talent heralded the earmark on Friday with a statement declaring, "Senate approves Talent's request to keep the C-17 line open" for "our highly skilled workers in Missouri".

The New York Times

The next day, when the cloud moved and I completed my journey, I learned that, after a similar belch of ash choked out all four engines of a K.L.M. flight into Anchorage in 1989, Ted Stevens finagled an earmark on an appropriations bill to secure federal funds for the Alaska Volcano Observatory, whose missions included the monitoring of volcanic activity and its attendant hazards.

The New Yorker

They use the money Congress has appropriated and if there were an earmark on some of the money there would simply be a little less for Presidents to dole out on their own.

Huffington Post

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

53 human-written examples

Can they use resources that may be earmarked for on-going projects, expecting them to be reimbursed?

The Guardian

This would be the first increase for the program since it moved from a program dependent on earmarks to one mostly driven by competitive grants.

Science Magazine

Logrolling was just one aspect of earmarks seized on by critics.

The New York Times

"Great strides have been made in looking at earmarks on the front end.

The New York Times

A site has been earmarked on Georgetown's east bank to accommodate 800 residents of four slum settlements, including Tiger Bay.

The Guardian

Mr. Young said that his earmark numbers were high because as ranking subcommittee member, he also seeks earmarks on behalf of other Republicans.

The New York Times

At the same time, Russia began giving an extra donation to WADA, with no reason earmarked on WADA's financial statements — an unusual move.

The New York Times - Sports

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Always use the correct preposition, which is "for", when indicating the intended recipient or purpose of an earmark. Using "earmark for" ensures clarity and grammatical accuracy.

Common error

Avoid using "on" after "earmark". The correct preposition to use is "for". For example, instead of writing "funds earmarked on this project", write "funds earmarked for this project".

Linguistic Context

The phrase "earmark on" functions incorrectly as a prepositional phrase. As indicated by Ludwig AI, the correct usage involves using the preposition "for" instead of "on" to accurately convey the intended destination or purpose of the earmarked funds or resources.

Expression frequency: Uncommon

Frequent in

News & Media

70%

Science

15%

Wiki

15%

Less common in

Formal & Business

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Social Media

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, while the phrase "earmark on" appears in various sources, it is grammatically incorrect. As Ludwig AI points out, the correct preposition to use with "earmark" is "for". The intended purpose is to designate funds or resources for a specific use or recipient. Correct usage such as "earmark for", "designate for", or "allocate to" will ensure clarity and accuracy in your writing. By avoiding "earmark on" you enhance the credibility of your writing.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

earmark for

This alternative uses the correct preposition 'for' to indicate the intended recipient or purpose of the earmark.

allocate to

This phrase replaces 'earmark' with 'allocate', a synonym, maintaining the preposition 'to' to indicate the recipient.

designate for

This phrase replaces 'earmark' with 'designate', suggesting a formal assignment for a specific purpose.

set aside for

This alternative emphasizes reserving something (like funds) for a particular use.

allocate funds to

This explicitly states the action of allocating financial resources to a specific project or entity.

assign to

This alternative suggests a formal assignment or allocation of resources.

appropriate for

Using 'appropriate' conveys that funds are officially approved for a specific reason.

dedicate to

This option highlights a commitment to using resources for a particular cause.

earmarked funds

This shorter option is still semantically linked and useful in the context of finance.

grant to

While "grant to" has to do with allocation, the purpose is more related to giving or allowing, which make this alternative less related.

FAQs

How should I correctly use "earmark" in a sentence?

The verb "earmark" should be followed by the preposition "for" to indicate the purpose or recipient. For example: "The funds were earmarked for the new school building."

What's the difference between "earmark for" and "allocate to"?

"Earmark for" and "allocate to" are similar; however, "earmark" often implies a specific designation within a larger budget, while "allocate" is a broader term for assigning resources.

What can I say instead of "earmark on"?

The correct phrase is "earmark for". You can also use alternatives like "designate for" or "set aside for" depending on the context.

Is "earmark on" grammatically correct?

No, "earmark on" is grammatically incorrect. The correct preposition to use with "earmark" is "for". Therefore, it should be "earmark for".