no charge with

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "no charge with" is not correct in standard written English.
It seems to be an incorrect combination of words and does not convey a clear meaning. Example: "There is no charge with this service."

⚠ May contain grammatical issues

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

15 human-written examples

No charge with admission.

The New York Times

No charge with museum admission.

The New York Times

No charge with garden admission: $3; those 65 and older, $1.50; those 15 and younger, free.

The New York Times

An initial 20-minute consultation is offered at no charge, with additional consultations available for $50.

The New York Times

No charge with garden admission: $3 655 and older, $1.50 155 and younger, no charge.

The New York Times

No charge with grounds admission of $4; students and those over 62, $2; members and those under 6, free.

The New York Times

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

44 human-written examples

He is no longer charged with any federal offence".

The Guardian

Drake was no longer charged with leaking classified documents, or with being part of a conspiracy.

The New Yorker

Cost: $35 a guest per day, or included at no extra charge with a spa treatment.

The New York Times - Travel

These components correspond to transitions from: an oxygen vacancy with a single positive charge to an oxygen interstitial with no charge [22 24], an oxygen vacancy with a single positive charge to an oxygen vacancy with no charge [25], an oxygen vacancy with no charge to the valance band [26], the conduction band to an oxygen vacancy with no charge [26 28], respectively.

Nanoscale Research Letters

There is no charge for cancellations with 48 hours' notice.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Avoid using "no charge with". Instead, opt for clearer and more grammatically correct alternatives like "free of charge" or "included at no extra cost".

Common error

The phrase "no charge with" is often used incorrectly, leading to confusion. Remember that it's better to use phrases like "free of charge" or "included with" to ensure clarity and grammatical correctness.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "no charge with" appears in contexts where the intention is to indicate that something is provided without an additional fee. However, Ludwig AI identifies this phrase as not grammatically sound, suggesting that it's an incorrect construction.

Expression frequency: Common

Frequent in

News & Media

67%

Science

17%

Wiki

8%

Less common in

Formal & Business

8%

Academia

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, while the phrase "no charge with" is used in various contexts, particularly in news and media, it is considered grammatically incorrect by Ludwig AI. The intended meaning is to convey that something is free or included without additional cost. However, it is recommended to use more standard and clear alternatives like "free of charge", "included with", or "at no extra cost". These alternatives ensure better clarity and grammatical correctness, especially in formal or professional communication. The frequency of the phrase's occurrence does not validate its use; opting for grammatically sound options enhances the quality of your writing.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

free of charge

Emphasizes that there is no cost involved; a more common and grammatically sound alternative.

at no cost

Highlights the absence of expense, similar to "free of charge" but more concise.

included at no extra cost

Specifically mentions that something is part of a package without adding to the price.

complimentary

Indicates that something is given as a courtesy or gift, implying no charge.

without charge

A more direct way of saying there is no fee.

at no additional charge

Stresses that there are no extra fees beyond what's already paid.

free with purchase

Highlights that something is free when buying something else.

no fee

Simply states that there is no fee associated with something.

gratis

A less common, more formal synonym for "free".

on the house

Typically used in restaurants or bars, indicating something is free courtesy of the establishment.

FAQs

What does "no charge with" mean?

The phrase "no charge with" is not grammatically correct in standard English. It's likely intended to mean something is free or included. Consider using alternatives like "free of charge" or "included with".

How can I use "free of charge" instead of "no charge with"?

Instead of saying "There is no charge with this service", say "This service is "free of charge"". It's clearer and grammatically correct.

What are some alternatives to "no charge with"?

Better alternatives include ""free of charge"", "at no cost", or "included with", depending on the context.

Is "no charge with" grammatically correct?

No, "no charge with" is not grammatically correct. It's an awkward phrasing. Use ""free of charge"" or similar expressions for better clarity.