it was spurious

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "it was spurious" is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it to describe something that is false, not genuine, or lacking authenticity. Example: "The evidence presented in the case was deemed unreliable because it was spurious."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

4 human-written examples

Turnbull said it was "spurious" to link safety and pay, and accused the Labor party of setting up the tribunal as a "recruiting tool" for the TWU.

The Guardian

He pointed out that earlier this month the high court had refused a diplomatic immunity claim by Saudi billionaire in divorce proceedings, saying it was "spurious".

The Guardian

Mr. Hardy, skinny and agile with a long white beard, said it was spurious even to consider the South Blocks as part of the Everglades -- just another effort by environmentalists to snatch more land from people and give it to animals, he said darkly.

The New York Times

Mr. Tejpal flatly denied this, and said it was spurious to claim that his magazine's journalism was somehow suspect, arguing that no publication has done more to highlight the plight of India's dispossessed than Tehelkha, which frequently runs exposés of corporate and political misdeeds.

The New York Times

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

53 human-written examples

'Image is everything?' By its very definition, it is spurious.

The Guardian - Lifestyle

It's this commitment that lays bare "jobs and growth" as a slogan as cynical as it is spurious.

The Guardian - Opinion

But, Dr. McGregor said, the association between the war experience and elevated cancer rates was very strong, adding, "I don't think it's spurious".

The New York Times

There's a reason it never made it out of there: I won't say it's spurious, but it doesn't quite feel authentic.

The New York Times

Like the 45-minute claim in the Iraq debate, it is "spurious, simple to take on board, and crucial in convincing parliament".

The Guardian - Opinion

First, they say, it is spurious to argue that the protection of airlines is a national defense issue because many other industries -- trucking, arms manufacturing and so on -- could just as easily argue that their security measures should be financed by taxpayers to keep their products away from terrorists.

The New York Times

It is spurious, however, to suggest that the chancellor is proposing the offences in order to stay ahead of the curve; or, as he put it: "Let us not wait for the next wave of scandals in financial markets to hit us before we respond".

The Guardian - Opinion

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "it was spurious" when you want to dismiss a claim or argument as being without merit or foundation. Ensure that the context clearly indicates what is being deemed spurious.

Common error

Avoid using "it was spurious" when a stronger term like "fraudulent" or "malicious" is more appropriate. "Spurious" implies a lack of genuine quality or validity, but not necessarily intentional deceit or harm.

Linguistic Context

It was spurious functions as a predicate adjective phrase. It is used to describe a noun or claim as being false, not genuine, or lacking authenticity. Ludwig AI indicates that the phrase is grammatically correct and usable in written English. The examples confirm this usage in dismissing claims or arguments.

Expression frequency: Rare

Frequent in

News & Media

50%

Science

50%

Formal & Business

0%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "it was spurious" is used to describe something that is false, not genuine, or lacking authenticity. Ludwig AI confirms its grammatical correctness and usability. As indicated by the examples, this phrase appears in both news and scientific contexts, demonstrating its applicability across various fields. Related phrases include "it was unfounded" and "it was baseless", offering alternative ways to express similar ideas. When employing this phrase, ensure that the context warrants the dismissal of a claim as lacking genuine quality or foundation, differentiating it from stronger terms like "fraudulent" or "malicious".

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

it was unfounded

Replaces 'spurious' with 'unfounded', suggesting a lack of basis in fact or evidence.

it was baseless

Similar to 'unfounded', 'baseless' implies the claim had no foundation or support.

it was fallacious

'Fallacious' indicates a flaw in reasoning or logic, making the argument invalid.

it was deceptive

'Deceptive' suggests an intention to mislead or create a false impression.

it was misleading

'Misleading' implies that something is likely to cause someone to believe something that is not true.

it was untrue

A straightforward replacement indicating a lack of truthfulness.

it was inaccurate

'Inaccurate' suggests a deviation from the truth or fact.

it was bogus

'Bogus' is a more informal term implying something fake or fraudulent.

it was sham

'Sham' indicates something pretended or counterfeit.

it was fabricated

'Fabricated' suggests that something was invented or made up.

FAQs

How can I use "it was spurious" in a sentence?

You can use "it was spurious" to describe something that lacks authenticity or is based on false ideas. For example, "The claim that the new policy would improve efficiency was spurious."

What are some alternatives to saying "it was spurious"?

Alternatives include "it was unfounded", "it was baseless", or "it was fallacious", depending on the specific nuance you want to convey.

Is it better to say "it was spurious" or "it was false"?

"It was false" is a more general statement, while "it was spurious" implies that something appears to be genuine but is not. The best choice depends on the context; use "it was spurious" when there's an element of deception or a lack of authenticity.

What is the difference between "it was spurious" and "it was misleading"?

"It was misleading" suggests that something is likely to cause someone to believe something that is not true. "It was spurious" implies that something lacks a sound basis in reasoning or evidence. The focus of "misleading" is on the effect it has on others, while the focus of "spurious" is on the inherent quality of the thing itself.