justifiable to omit

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "justifiable to omit" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing whether it is reasonable or acceptable to leave out certain information or details in a given context. Example: "In this report, it may be justifiable to omit the less relevant data to maintain clarity and focus on the main findings."

✓ Grammatically correct

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

60 human-written examples

Best to omit names here.

The New York Times

Another that is impossible to omit.

The Guardian

It's certainly an odd move to omit that feature.

TechCrunch

Guides are instructed to omit this information from tours.

Vice

Director Damien Chazelle defended his decision to omit the moment.

Huffington Post

How had the moderator chosen to omit her title?

Huffington Post

Use graphics to omit data.

WikiHow

Would I have thought it justifiable to use wire tapping?

The Guardian

It sounds burdensome and not justifiable to me.

The New York Times

Is it ethically justifiable to stop doing everything that could be done for a patient?

The New York Times - Health

They anguish about when, if ever, it is justifiable to lie to the young.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When deciding if it's "justifiable to omit" information, consider your audience and the core message. Only remove elements that truly distract from or dilute the central point.

Common error

Avoid omitting information to the point where the remaining content becomes misleading or lacks essential context. Ensure that omissions enhance clarity, not create ambiguity.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "justifiable to omit" functions as an evaluative connector, indicating that there's a valid reason or excuse for not including certain information or details. Based on the Ludwig AI, it implies an assessment of whether the omission is reasonable or acceptable.

Expression frequency: Missing

Frequent in

Science

0%

News & Media

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Less common in

Science

0%

News & Media

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "justifiable to omit" is grammatically sound but not commonly used. It serves to rationalize the exclusion of certain details, suggesting that the omission is both permissible and potentially advantageous. Ludwig AI indicates that this assessment implies reasonability and acceptability. While alternatives such as "excusable to leave out" or "reasonable to not include" exist, remember to ensure that any omissions maintain clarity and avoid misleading the audience. Its usage is relevant in scenarios where providing a rationale for excluding information is important.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

justified in excluding

Suggests that someone has proper justification for excluding something.

excusable to leave out

Emphasizes the possibility of being excused for leaving something out.

warranted to leave out

Highlights that there is a good reason to leave something out.

defensible to exclude

Highlights the ability to defend the act of excluding something.

reasonable to not include

Stresses the rationality behind not including something.

understandable to exclude

Focuses on the comprehensibility of excluding something.

permissible to skip

Indicates that skipping something is allowed.

acceptable to disregard

Suggests that disregarding something is within the bounds of acceptability.

valid to exclude

Highlights the validity in excluding particular information.

appropriate to not mention

Emphasizes the appropriateness of not mentioning something.

FAQs

When is it appropriate to say something is "justifiable to omit"?

You can use "justifiable to omit" when you believe that leaving out certain information is reasonable and won't compromise the integrity or clarity of the subject.

What are some alternatives to "justifiable to omit"?

You can use alternatives like "excusable to leave out", "reasonable to not include", or "justified in excluding".

Is "justifiable to omit" grammatically correct?

Yes, "justifiable to omit" is grammatically correct, though it's not a very common phrase.

How does "justifiable to omit" differ from "necessary to include"?

"Justifiable to omit" suggests that something can be reasonably left out, while "necessary to include" implies that something is essential and cannot be omitted without causing a problem.