listed in order of addition

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "listed in order of addition" is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it when describing a sequence or arrangement of items that have been added over time, indicating their chronological order. Example: "The items in the inventory are listed in order of addition, starting with the most recently added products."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

1 human-written examples

Reagents listed in order of addition.

Geochemical Transactions

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

59 human-written examples

(Players are listed in order of merit).

The New York Times

Listed in order of preference.

The New York Times - Food

Teams listed in order of projected finish.

The Guardian - Sport

Listed in order of preference in each category.

The New York Times - Food

These six wines are listed in order of preference.

The New York Times - Style

The following wines are listed in order of preference.

The New York Times - Food

These six bottles are listed in order of preference.

The New York Times - Food

The six wines here are listed in order of preference.

The New York Times - Food

Are those fields listed in order of importance?

The New York Times - Arts

Companies are listed in order of 2002 sales.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "listed in order of addition", ensure the context clearly indicates what is being added and the basis for the order. For example, specify "files listed in order of addition to the database".

Common error

Avoid using "listed in order of addition" without explicitly stating what is being added. Ambiguity can arise if the reader doesn't know what constitutes the 'addition' being referenced.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "listed in order of addition" functions as a prepositional phrase that modifies a verb. According to Ludwig, the phrase is correct and usable in written English. It specifies the method of arrangement or presentation.

Expression frequency: Rare

Frequent in

Science

60%

News & Media

30%

Formal & Business

10%

Less common in

Wiki

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "listed in order of addition" is a correct and usable phrase, though relatively rare. Ludwig indicates it's used to specify that items are arranged chronologically based on when they were added. While generally neutral in register, this phrase is most commonly found in scientific and news media contexts. To ensure clarity, it's best to explicitly state what is being added to prevent ambiguity.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

sequenced by addition

Replaces "listed" with "sequenced" offering a more technical tone.

arranged by date added

Specifies the criterion for ordering: the date something was added.

ordered chronologically by addition

More explicitly indicates a time-based sequence.

presented according to addition sequence

Uses "presented" to indicate a more formal presentation.

organized by insertion time

Focuses on the time of insertion as the basis for the order.

tabulated by entry date

Suggests the information is in a table and uses "entry date" for clarity.

categorized by time of addition

Emphasizes the act of categorizing based on the time of addition.

indexed by addition order

Implies the items are indexed and the index is based on the order they were added.

displayed in order of inclusion

Highlights the act of including items and the sequence in which they were included.

itemized by sequence of addition

Focuses on the act of itemizing according to when each item was added.

FAQs

What does "listed in order of addition" mean?

It means items are presented or displayed according to the sequence in which they were added or included. The first item added appears first, followed by the second, and so on.

How can I rephrase "listed in order of addition"?

You could use alternatives such as "arranged by date added", "sequenced by addition", or "ordered chronologically by addition" depending on the specific context.

Is it always necessary to specify "in order of addition"?

No, it is not always necessary, but it provides clarity. If the order is obvious from the context, specifying "in order of addition" might be redundant. However, if the order isn't clear, including it clarifies the sequence.

What's the difference between "listed in order of addition" and "listed in order of importance"?

"Listed in order of addition" refers to a chronological sequence based on when items were added. "Listed in order of importance", on the other hand, refers to an arrangement based on the level of significance or priority.