Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
The phrase "flash for" is not grammatically correct and is not commonly used in written or spoken English
It is possible that it could be used in informal or colloquial speech, but it is not considered standard or proper English. It would be more appropriate to use the phrase "flash on" or "flash at" in most situations. For example: Incorrect: I have a flash for photography. Correct: I have a flash for photography. Incorrect: She needs to flash for the camera. Correct: She needs to flash at the camera. Incorrect: The lights will flash for the duration of the performance. Correct: The lights will flash during the performance.
Exact(60)
HERE'S a news flash for you.
I was using a built-in flash for the first time.
Available in red or green, the lights flash for up to 12 hours (batteries included).
The avenue is deserted, and the traffic lights and neon signs flash for no one.
What has held up the advance of flash for industrial-strength computing has been price.
She has played sparingly since then: no news flash for a Williams sister.
Adobe executives say the new Flash for televisions will support such high-definition video.
That is enough to buy roughly 40 megabytes of flash for each person on earth.
The phone will use the screen to mimic a camera flash for front-facing photos.
Here's a news flash for you: Black Americans want to celebrate Mr. Clinton.
No wonder they've lined up Legends of Tomorrow to spin off of The Flash for 2015.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
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
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com