no casualties

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "no casualties" is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it when referring to a situation where people did not suffer any injuries or death. For example, "Fortunately, there were no casualties when the tornado hit our town."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

It isn't realistic to adopt a "no casualties" policy.

Forbes

There were no casualties.

The New York Times

No casualties for us...

The New York Times

It reported no casualties.

The New York Times

"Luckily, there were no casualties.

The New York Times

The military reported no casualties.

The New York Times

No casualties were reported immediately.

The New York Times

No casualties were immediately reported.

The New York Times

As it was, there were no casualties.

The New York Times

No casualties were reported in either landing.

The New York Times

"We have no casualties or injuries".

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "no casualties" to concisely report the absence of injuries or deaths in incidents like accidents, natural disasters, or conflicts. For example, "The fire was quickly contained, and there were no casualties."

Common error

Avoid using "no casualties" when referring to situations where loss or harm is inevitable or expected, such as in financial investments or competitive sports. It's specifically for scenarios involving potential physical harm or loss of life.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "no casualties" functions as a noun phrase, typically serving as a direct object or subject complement. As confirmed by Ludwig AI, it indicates the absence of deaths or injuries in a particular incident or situation. It is used to provide a concise summary of the outcome.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

85%

Wiki

7%

Formal & Business

3%

Less common in

Science

2%

Reference

1%

Encyclopedias

1%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "no casualties" is a grammatically correct and widely used expression to indicate the absence of deaths or injuries in an event. Ludwig AI confirms its validity and usability in various contexts. It is most frequently found in news reports and formal statements. While it's suitable for a wide range of situations where physical harm is a concern, it should be avoided in contexts where loss or harm is inevitable. Alternative phrases like "no fatalities" or "no injuries" can be used depending on the specific emphasis needed.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

no fatalities

Replaces "casualties" with "fatalities", emphasizing the absence of deaths.

zero deaths

Specifically highlights the absence of deaths.

no injuries

Focuses on the absence of physical harm or wounds.

nobody hurt

Uses informal language to express that no one was injured.

all survived

Indicates that everyone involved in an incident lived through it.

no one was harmed

Emphasizes the lack of harm inflicted on any individuals.

without loss of life

A more formal way of saying no one died.

no one was killed or injured

Combines the absence of deaths and injuries in one phrase.

escaped unharmed

Focuses on the idea that people avoided injury or harm.

came through unscathed

Suggests that people emerged from a dangerous situation without any injuries or damage.

FAQs

How can I use "no casualties" in a sentence?

You can use "no casualties" to indicate that an event occurred without any deaths or injuries. For example, "Despite the severity of the storm, there were "no casualties" reported".

What can I say instead of "no casualties"?

You can use alternatives like "no fatalities", "zero deaths", or "no injuries" depending on the context.

Is it appropriate to use "no casualties" in a formal report?

Yes, "no casualties" is appropriate for formal reports, especially in news, emergency services, or official incident reports where conveying the absence of deaths or injuries is necessary. It is concise and widely understood.

What's the difference between "no casualties" and "no victims"?

"No casualties" specifically refers to the absence of deaths or physical injuries, while "no victims" can refer to the absence of anyone suffering any kind of harm, including emotional or financial distress. Casualties are a subset of victims.