had been identified

USAGE SUMMARY

"had been identified" is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it in the past perfect tense to indicate an action that happened before another action in the past. For example: The suspect had been identified before the police issued a warrant for his arrest.

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

56 human-written examples

But he had been identified.

The Guardian

Not all those killed had been identified.

The New York Times

By nightfall, relatives said 11 had been identified.

The New York Times

He did not say whether any candidates had been identified.

The New York Times

A police spokeswoman said Sunday no suspects had been identified.

The Guardian

He said all victims in the hospital had been identified.

The Guardian

The mysterious four-year-old had been identified.

The Guardian

Doctors said 116 of the victims had been identified.

The Guardian

By August 2014, 35 had been identified with trapped wires.

The Guardian - Business

She had been identified from intercepted Soviet cables.

The New York Times

He had been identified by his front-row seat.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "had been identified" to clearly establish that the identification occurred before a subsequent event in the past. This helps to maintain a clear chronological order in your writing.

Common error

Avoid using "was identified" when you need to emphasize that the identification happened before another past action. "Was identified" does not clearly convey the sequence of events.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "had been identified" functions as a passive construction in the past perfect tense. Ludwig AI confirms its correctness and usability. It signifies that an act of identification was completed before another action took place in the past. For example, "The suspect had been identified before the police issued a warrant."

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

52%

Science

30%

Formal & Business

9%

Less common in

Academia

5%

Encyclopedias

2%

Reference

2%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "had been identified" is a grammatically correct and frequently used phrase in English, as confirmed by Ludwig AI. It's employed to indicate that an act of identifying someone or something was completed before another event in the past. This phrase is particularly common in news and media, as well as in scientific contexts. Remember to use it when you need to clearly establish a chronological sequence of past events. Common alternatives include "was recognized" and "had been detected", but choosing the best option depends on the specific nuance you wish to convey.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

had been recognized

Focuses on the acknowledgement of something known previously.

had been detected

Similar to "had been identified", but focuses on the act of detecting something.

had been pinpointed

Suggests a more accurate and precise identification.

was recognized

Focuses on the act of recognition rather than the process of identification.

had been discovered

Suggests finding something new or previously unknown.

was determined

Emphasizes the act of establishing something definitively.

was ascertained

Highlights the effort taken to find something out for certain.

was pinpointed

Suggests a more precise or exact identification.

was detected

Implies discovering something that was previously hidden or unknown.

was uncovered

Suggests something was revealed or brought to light.

FAQs

How to use "had been identified" in a sentence?

"Had been identified" is used to indicate that something was identified at a point in the past, before another event also in the past. For example, "The suspect "had been identified" before the police arrived".

What can I say instead of "had been identified"?

You can use alternatives like "was recognized", "was determined", or "had been detected" depending on the context.

Which is correct, "had been identified" or "was identified"?

"Had been identified" is used to show that the identification occurred before another event in the past. "Was identified" simply indicates that the identification happened at some point in the past, without specifying its relation to another event. Choose the one that best fits the timeline of your narrative.

What's the difference between "had been identified" and "had been identifying"?

"Had been identified" indicates a completed action of identification in the past, while "had been identifying" suggests a continuous process of identifying over a period of time in the past.