in orders of

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "in orders of" is not correct in standard written English.
It may be a confusion with "in order of," which is used to indicate a sequence or arrangement based on a specific criterion. Example: "The items were arranged in order of their importance."

⚠ May contain grammatical issues

Science

News & Media

Formal & Business

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

Assuming that most nations aren't actually interested in taking in orders of magnitude more migrants than they do now, the vast majority of those who will be displaced by climate change will simply have no place outside their own countries where they can go.

The Washington Post

Uber's latest pitch was directed mainly to a select crew of large asset managers, who could easily put in orders of $100 million or more, according to people familiar with the matter.

Los Angeles Times

Jibo presold $4m in orders of the automaton's home and developer editions, priced at $749 each.

The Guardian

Economists had expected a decrease in orders of more than 10percentt.

The New York Times

A chef finishes albacore achiote tacos, which come in orders of two or three, with pickled red onion.

The New Yorker

Tacos arrive in orders of three, with a simple garnish of cilantro, onions, and a sliver of lime.

The New Yorker

Ms. Mendez said her appearances in family and criminal court resulted in orders of protection to spare her and Delila from her father's physical abuse.

The New York Times

Lisa Kent, Netgrocer's president, said that the company had seen a sharp increase in orders of Parmalat milk and batteries since the terrorist attacks.

The New York Times - Tech

New orders for durable goods slid by a seasonally adjusted 2.4percentt from July, reflecting a 40percentt monthly decrease in orders of civilian aircraft.

The New York Times

In April, big increases came in orders of electronic equipment, which surged nearly 28percentt, and large-scale machinery, up 4.2percentt.

The New York Times

In orders of 500 to 1,999 shares of large stocks, the Big Board executed trades in 17.4 seconds, versus 24 seconds on Nasdaq.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When you intend to express a sequence or arrangement, use "in order of" instead of "in orders of". This ensures grammatical correctness and clarity.

Common error

Many writers mistakenly use "in orders of" when they mean "in order of", which is the correct way to express a sequence or arrangement. Always double-check your spelling and phrasing to avoid this error.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "in orders of" is often used as a prepositional phrase to describe arrangement or scale. However, based on Ludwig AI, it is generally considered grammatically incorrect. It seems to be a confusion or misuse of the correct phrase "in order of" or "by orders of magnitude."

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

Science

43%

News & Media

38%

Formal & Business

19%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

While the phrase "in orders of" appears with some frequency, particularly in scientific and news contexts, Ludwig AI indicates that it is generally considered grammatically incorrect. It is often used when "in order of" or "by orders of magnitude" are more appropriate. Therefore, it's advisable to favor the grammatically sound alternatives to ensure clarity and maintain professionalism in writing. Although common, continued use of "in orders of" risks undermining credibility, especially in formal communications.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

in order of

Grammatically correct alternative focusing on a specific sequence of arrangement.

by orders of magnitude

Similar in conveying scale, adds emphasis on the exponential nature.

in sequence of

Focuses on the sequential arrangement rather than the magnitude.

arranged by

Implies a specific arrangement based on a particular criterion.

ranked by

Specifically implies a ranking or hierarchical arrangement.

according to

Indicates arrangement based on a defined system or set of rules.

grouped by

Suggests arrangement based on shared characteristics or categories.

in terms of

Refers to a specific aspect or measurement, often quantitative.

on the scale of

Emphasizes magnitude and range rather than sequential order.

categorized by

Highlights the process of sorting into distinct categories.

FAQs

What does "in orders of" mean?

"In orders of" is generally considered grammatically incorrect. A possible correction is to use "in order of" which means arranged according to a specific sequence or criterion.

Is "in orders of magnitude" correct?

While "in orders of" is questionable, "by orders of magnitude" is a valid phrase used to describe significant differences in scale or quantity. Consider rephrasing your sentence for clarity and grammatical accuracy.

What can I say instead of "in orders of"?

Depending on the context, you can use phrases like "in order of", "arranged by", or "according to" to convey the intended meaning more accurately.

Which is correct, "in orders of" or "in order of"?

"In order of" is the correct phrase to use when indicating a sequence or arrangement. "In orders of" is generally considered grammatically incorrect.