lacks substance

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "lacks substance" is grammatically correct and can be used in written English.
It is typically used to describe something that is vague, superficial, or lacking in depth or importance. Example: The politician's speech may have been well-delivered, but it ultimately lacks substance when it comes to addressing the real issues at hand.

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

29 human-written examples

But Tobiasson-Svartman lacks substance too.

The New York Times - Books

Not that the May Festival Chorus lacks substance.

The New York Times - Arts

The result is that the movie, which is full of anecdote, lacks substance.

The New Yorker

"I don't want to bash Sarah Palin, but she lacks substance," Mr. Sorensen said.

The New York Times

"The Tory-led Government's plan for a cap on migration lacks substance and credibility.

Independent

But the problem is, a Bo Xilai road without Bo Xilai lacks substance.

The New York Times

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

31 human-written examples

Did it lack substance?

The New York Times

His words were warm, but lacked substance.

The Guardian

Such plans lack substance and logic.

The Guardian - Sport

The civil-rights-themed scenes lacked substance, we thought.

The New York Times

The moments that alter political fate often lack substance.

The New York Times - Magazine

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When criticizing an argument or idea, use "lacks substance" to clearly communicate that it is not well-supported by evidence or reasoning. Be specific about what is missing to make your critique more constructive.

Common error

Avoid using "lacks substance" as a general insult without providing specific reasons. Support your assertion by explaining what specific elements are missing or inadequate to make your criticism more credible and helpful.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "lacks substance" functions as a predicate, attributing a quality of deficiency to a subject. It indicates that something is missing essential qualities or depth, as seen in Ludwig examples where plans, arguments, or even people are described as such. As confirmed by Ludwig AI, the expression is perfectly grammatical.

Expression frequency: Common

Frequent in

News & Media

70%

Wiki

15%

Formal & Business

10%

Less common in

Science

2%

Academia

1%

Reference

2%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "lacks substance" is a grammatically sound and commonly used expression to indicate a deficiency in depth, factual support, or meaningful content. As noted by Ludwig AI, it is suitable for a wide range of contexts, though most frequently encountered in news and media. When using this phrase, it's crucial to provide specific examples of what is missing to strengthen your critique. Alternatives such as "is devoid of content" or "is shallow and superficial" can be used to add nuance to your writing. Remember that, while the phrase itself is correct, overuse without justification can weaken your argument.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

is devoid of content

Highlights the absence of meaningful information or ideas.

is wanting in essence

Emphasizes a deficiency in the core or fundamental nature of something.

is shallow and superficial

Indicates a lack of depth and a focus on the surface level.

is without merit

Suggests a lack of value or worth.

is thin on details

Focuses on the absence of specific or supporting information.

is merely superficial

Similar to being shallow, with an emphasis on appearance over reality.

is fundamentally flawed

Focuses on an underlying weakness in the foundation or design.

doesn't hold water

An idiomatic way of saying that an argument or idea is not credible or convincing.

is vacuous and empty

Indicates a lack of meaningful content or intellectual value.

is built on sand

Suggests that something is built on a weak or unstable foundation.

FAQs

How can I use "lacks substance" in a sentence?

You can use "lacks substance" to critique an argument, a plan, or even a creative work. For example, "The politician's promises "lacks substance" because they are not backed by concrete plans".

What are some alternatives to saying something "lacks substance"?

Depending on the context, you could use alternatives like "is devoid of content", "is wanting in essence", or "is shallow and superficial".

Is it better to say "lacks substance" or "is insubstantial"?

Both phrases are similar, but ""lacks substance"" is often used when criticizing something for not having enough factual support or depth. "Insubstantial" might be used more broadly to describe something lacking solidity or weight.

What does it mean when someone says an argument "lacks substance"?

It means the argument is weak, poorly supported, or based on flimsy evidence. It suggests that the argument doesn't have enough solid reasoning or facts to be convincing. The opposite is to have "strong evidence".