is to kill

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "is to kill" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in contexts where you are explaining a purpose or intention, often in a philosophical or narrative sense. Example: "The ultimate goal of the villain in the story is to kill the hero and take over the kingdom."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Academia

Wiki

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

One is to kill him.

The New Yorker

Their mission is to kill muskrats.

The New York Times

But the view is to kill for.

The New York Times

"The intent is to kill people".

The New York Times

The goal of cancer therapy is to kill cancer cells.

Drug Resistance Updates

The goal is to kill your opponents by shooting them.

Stanford University

The object is to kill the ISIS terrorists".

The New Yorker

The goal is to kill all of the other children.

The New Yorker

Their first philosophy is to kill a Shiite".

The New York Times

The point here is to kill the lobster.

The New York Times - Food

To treat people like this is to kill those people.

The Guardian

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "is to kill", ensure the context clearly defines the subject and object of the action to avoid ambiguity. For example, specify who is doing the killing and who or what is being killed.

Common error

Avoid using "is to kill" casually in situations where it could be misinterpreted as a threat or insensitive statement. Choose more neutral language when discussing delicate topics.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "is to kill" functions primarily as an infinitive phrase expressing purpose or intention. As shown by Ludwig, it commonly connects a subject or action with the intended outcome of causing death or destruction. It elucidates the objective behind an action or strategy.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

51%

Wiki

24%

Science

16%

Less common in

Academia

9%

Formal & Business

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "is to kill" is a grammatically correct and commonly used expression that serves to define a purpose or objective involving the act of causing death or destruction. As demonstrated by Ludwig, its usage spans diverse contexts, from news and media to scientific and academic discussions. While the phrase is generally acceptable, it is crucial to consider the sensitivity of the context and choose alternative phrasings when appropriate. The frequency of "is to kill" in reputable sources underscores its validity as a functional element of the English language.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

aims to eliminate

Focuses on removing or eradicating, suggesting a more thorough or strategic approach than simply killing.

intends to destroy

Emphasizes complete ruin or obliteration, implying a more forceful and destructive action.

seeks to neutralize

Highlights rendering something harmless or ineffective, suggesting a more controlled or calculated approach.

plans to execute

Implies a premeditated and deliberate act, often with legal or official connotations.

strives to eradicate

Denotes a determined effort to completely eliminate something, often a problem or disease.

endeavors to terminate

Suggests a formal or decisive ending, often in a business or legal context.

wants to obliterate

Conveys a strong desire to completely wipe something out, emphasizing the intensity of the intention.

aspires to annihilate

Implies a goal of total destruction or elimination, often on a large scale.

resolved to dispatch

Suggests a firm decision to send someone or something away quickly, often implying death.

purposes to slay

Uses a more archaic or dramatic term for killing, adding a sense of theatricality or legend.

FAQs

How can I rephrase "is to kill" to sound less aggressive?

Consider using alternatives like "aims to eliminate", "seeks to neutralize", or "intends to destroy" depending on the specific context and desired nuance.

Is it grammatically correct to use "is to kill" in a sentence?

Yes, the phrase "is to kill" is grammatically correct and commonly used to express purpose or intention. However, be mindful of the context to ensure it aligns with the intended meaning and tone.

What's the difference between "is to kill" and "is to eliminate"?

"Is to kill" directly implies causing death, whereas "is to eliminate" can refer to removing something without necessarily causing death. For example, you might say the goal is to eliminate a problem, not kill it.

In what contexts is "is to kill" most appropriately used?

"Is to kill" is often used in discussions about military strategy, video games, cancer therapy, or hypothetical scenarios where causing death is a deliberate objective. In more sensitive or professional settings, consider rephrasing with alternatives like "aims to eradicate" or "seeks to neutralize".