lacking the depth of

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "lacking the depth of" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to describe something that is not as profound or complex as another thing. Example: "The sequel was entertaining, but it was lacking the depth of the original film."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Sport

Arts

Lifestyle

Wiki

Encyclopedias

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

3 human-written examples

The stage version of "The Year of Magical Thinking," lacking the depth of its author's long-form work, spells things out more than one might expect.

The New York Times

Many loved its experimentalism and found it bold, ambitious and moving; others felt the band was not prominent enough, and some Curtis fans found the film vague and lacking the depth of his  previous work.

BBC

Hal is and always will be a politician, ruthlessly ambitious and lacking the depth of the Prince of Denmark.

Huffington Post

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

57 human-written examples

Such marks lacked the depth of letterpress type.

The New Yorker

They simply lack the depth of clubs with deeper pockets.

The Guardian - Sport

Of course, half a discontinuous year lacks the depth of a long sojourn abroad.

The New York Times - Magazine

Some say that the score lacks the depth of traditional concert music.

The New York Times

They also lacked the depth of Golden State, and wore down as Curry, Thompson and Andre Iguodala hit jumper after jumper.

The Guardian - Sport

The barbecue ribs were fall-from-the-bone tender but lacked the depth of flavor that smoking delivers.

The New York Times

They were elegant, but lacked the depth of the originals, both of which are vivid examples of how gentle voices can still deliver emotional heft and complexity.

The New York Times - Arts

It was a move not universally welcomed by listeners on the 5 Live message boards, some of whom suggested he lacked the depth of his predecessor, Simon Mayo.

The Guardian

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "lacking the depth of", ensure you clearly identify what is missing the depth and what it is being compared to, providing a concrete point of reference for your audience.

Common error

Avoid using "lacking the depth of" in vague or overly general statements. Instead, provide specific examples or details to support your claim about the lack of depth.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "lacking the depth of" functions as a comparative descriptor. It's used to indicate that something does not possess the same level of profundity, complexity, or completeness as another entity. Ludwig AI confirms this phrase is usable in written English.

Expression frequency: Uncommon

Frequent in

News & Media

73%

Sport

10%

Arts

8%

Less common in

Lifestyle

3%

Wiki

3%

Encyclopedias

2%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "lacking the depth of" is a grammatically sound and usable expression to compare the profundity or complexity of two subjects, with Ludwig AI confirming its legitimacy. While it isn't overly common, occurring mostly in News & Media and Sport contexts, it's suitable for both neutral and formal writing. When using this phrase, be sure to clearly define what lacks depth and what it is being compared against to avoid vagueness.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

without the profundity of

Emphasizes the absence of intellectual or emotional depth, focusing on the quality of being profound.

missing the substance of

Highlights the absence of essential content or meaning, focusing on the core elements.

devoid of the complexity of

Stresses the absence of intricate details or multifaceted nature, focusing on intricacy.

absent the richness of

Focuses on the absence of abundance or fullness, referring to the quality of being rich.

not as profound as

Directly indicates a lower degree of intellectual or emotional depth compared to something else.

without the intricacies of

Highlights the absence of complex or detailed elements, focusing on the detail.

lacking the nuance of

Emphasizes the absence of subtle differences or delicate variations in expression or meaning.

does not possess the gravity of

Highlights the absence of weightiness or seriousness, focusing on the importance of the topic.

falls short of the insight of

Indicates a failure to reach the same level of understanding or perceptiveness.

doesn't have the weight of

Highlights the absence of importance, influence, and/or seriousness.

FAQs

How can I use "lacking the depth of" in a sentence?

You can use "lacking the depth of" to compare something that is superficial or incomplete to something more profound or thorough. For example, "This analysis is "lacking the depth of" a more comprehensive study".

What are some alternatives to "lacking the depth of"?

Alternatives include "without the profundity of", "missing the substance of", or "devoid of the complexity of", depending on the specific nuance you want to convey.

Is it better to say "lacking depth" or "lacking the depth of"?

While "lacking depth" is grammatically correct, "lacking the depth of" is often used to draw a direct comparison. "This report is "lacking depth"" is acceptable, but "This report is "lacking the depth of" a peer-reviewed study" provides a clearer comparison.

What's the difference between "lacking the depth of" and "superficial"?

"Superficial" implies a lack of thoroughness or engagement with the surface only. "Lacking the depth of" suggests a missing level of complexity, insight, or profundity that something else possesses. Something can be superficial without explicitly "lacking the depth of" a specific comparison point.