it was lost for

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "it was lost for" is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it to indicate a duration of time during which something was missing or unaccounted for. Example: "The document was lost for several weeks before it was finally found in the archives."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Wiki

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

14 human-written examples

The painting is so ubiquitous today, it's hard to believe it was lost for 30 years following its removal from the Ashmolean.

The Guardian - Arts

Though it was lost for a time, the land is surely regaining its color.

Huffington Post

Time passed and everyone – director included – figured it was lost for ever.

The Guardian - Film

He didn't lose it; it was lost for him by his two immediate subordinates, Marshals Ney and Grouchy.

Independent

It was lost for over a century but has since been unearthed and Roald Dahl illustrator Quentin Blake is working on drawings to bring it to life.

Independent

"It literally will end up 10 feet or maybe 20 feet away from where it was lost for 40 years," Mr. Baker said.

The New York Times

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

46 human-written examples

All records of how and when the fire started, and who caused it, were lost for good.

The Economist

"I'm sad when I see that artisanship is going to die," says Hash. "All that tradition is going, and once it's lost it's lost for ever.

The Guardian - Lifestyle

"Within the UK it's very hard to get funding," he explains, "and the problem is that once the expertise is lost in a country, it's lost for good".

Independent

"It looks like it is lost for this session and for the foreseeable future," said Michael Botwinick, director of the Hudson River Museum in Yonkers, who worked on the bill as a board member of the Museum Association of New York.

The New York Times - Arts

For that which is absorbed by the minute parts is not absolutely lost for the universe, although it is lost for the total force of the concurrent bodies" (GM VI.230/Langley 670).

SEP

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "it was lost for", ensure the context clearly defines what "it" refers to and the unit of time being measured (e.g., "it was lost for decades", "it was lost for a short time").

Common error

Avoid using "it was lost for" without a clear reference to what "it" represents. This can confuse readers and make the sentence ambiguous. Always ensure the antecedent is clearly established.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "it was lost for" typically functions as part of a clause, indicating a period during which something was missing or unaccounted for. As confirmed by Ludwig, the phrase is correct and usable in written English. Examples show its use in various contexts, detailing the duration of the loss.

Expression frequency: Common

Frequent in

News & Media

43%

Wiki

21%

Science

14%

Less common in

Formal & Business

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "it was lost for" is a grammatically sound and commonly used expression to describe the duration of a period during which something was missing. Ludwig AI confirms its correct usage. The expression is most frequently found in news and media contexts but is also present in wikis and scientific publications. While versatile, ensure the antecedent of "it" is clear to avoid ambiguity. Using alternatives like "it remained missing for" can add formality. The phrase is useful for providing temporal context to a state of being lost.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

it had been missing for

Emphasizes the duration of the absence using the past perfect continuous tense.

it remained missing for

Focuses on the state of being missing over a period of time.

it disappeared for

Highlights the suddenness of the loss and its duration.

it went astray for

Suggests a deviation from the correct path or location and its duration.

it was misplaced for

Implies a temporary and unintentional loss, emphasizing its duration.

it was gone for

Simple and direct alternative, indicating a period of absence.

it was unaccounted for for

Emphasizes the lack of knowledge about its whereabouts for a duration.

it was irretrievable for

Highlights the inability to recover it during that time, focusing on the state of being lost.

it had vanished for

Similar to disappeared but suggests a more complete or mysterious disappearance.

it was AWOL for

Uses military slang to describe its absence, adding an informal tone.

FAQs

How can I rephrase "it was lost for" to sound more formal?

For a more formal tone, consider using phrases like "it remained missing for" or "it was unaccounted for for", which convey a similar meaning with increased sophistication.

Is it correct to say "it's lost for" instead of "it was lost for"?

While "it's lost for" might be used colloquially, "it was lost for" is grammatically more correct in most formal writing contexts, especially when referring to a past event or duration.

What's the difference between "it was missing for" and "it was lost for"?

"It was missing for" generally implies a temporary absence or that the item is expected to be found, whereas "it was lost for" can suggest a more permanent state or a longer period of absence. However, in many contexts, they are interchangeable.

What are some common things that might be described as "lost for" a period of time?

Objects, documents, data, connections, and even people can be described as "it was lost for" a certain duration. The phrase simply indicates that something was not where it should be or could not be accessed for a specific period.