non substantial

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "non substantial" is not correct in standard written English; the correct term is "non-substantial." You can use it when referring to something that lacks significant weight, importance, or value.
Example: "The committee decided that the evidence presented was non-substantial and did not warrant further investigation."

⚠ May contain grammatical issues

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

60 human-written examples

Monetary rewards are positively related to non-substantial contributions (Frey et al. 2011).

Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research

If there are non-substantial particulars, then Socrates' whiteness is a numerically distinct particular from Plato's whiteness.

SEP

That is, Spinoza endorses a principle of ontological plenitude (POP), according to which the greatest number of compossible non-substantial objects actually exists.

SEP

For the Mādhyamika not only is there no substantial self, there is also no substantial basis on which a non-substantial self could be built.

SEP

In the first instance, if Aristotle does accept the existence of non-substantial particulars, he certainly does not think that they can exist apart from primary substances — indeed, it is most natural to interpret Aristotle on this point as thinking that a non-substantial particular is a dependent entity, individuated only by reference to primary s substance that it is present in.

SEP

Frey et al. (2011) 104 samples from an online survey on a platform Monetary incentive tends to be positively related to making non-substantial contribution, whereas non-monetary incentive tends to breed more substantial postings.

Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research

(Mutual "non-obstruction" or muge here must be understood to mean what allows for their interrelations and interpenetrations that constitute things. In being non-substantial, they do not obstruct each other.

SEP

In speaking of a "a kind of contradiction" here, Mill acknowledges a thought which might seem to echo Frege's, concerning the essentially 'unsaturated' (dependent, non-substantial) character of concepts.

SEP

Earlier, I noted that Spinoza thinks infinitely many non-substantial objects exist: "From the necessity of the divine nature there must follow infinitely many things in infinitely many ways, i.e., everything which can fall under an infinite intellect" (Ip16).

SEP

We have already implicitly encountered in passing two of Aristotle's appeals to category theory: (i) in his approach to time, which he comes to treat as a non-substantial being; and (ii) in his commitment to the core-dependent homonymy of being, which introduces some rather more contentious considerations.

SEP

Lowe argues that recognizing the ontologically fundamental distinction between substantial universals (natural kinds) and non-substantial universals (properties) accounts for the laws of nature in a manner that, while avoiding the problems of a regularity account, may nonetheless do without Armstrong's second order relation of necessitation, itself a relational universal (Armstrong 1983, 75 110).

SEP

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Always use the correct form: "non-substantial" with a hyphen. This ensures clarity and grammatical accuracy in your writing.

Common error

The most common error is omitting the hyphen, writing "non substantial" instead of "non-substantial". This changes the meaning and is grammatically incorrect.

Linguistic Context

The primary grammatical function of "non substantial" when corrected to "non-substantial", is that of a modifier or adjective. Ludwig AI confirms the term "non substantial" is not correct in standard English and should be written with a hyphen, "non-substantial".

Expression frequency: Missing

Frequent in

Science

0%

News & Media

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Less common in

Science

0%

News & Media

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "non substantial" is grammatically incorrect. The correct form is "non-substantial", with a hyphen. According to Ludwig AI, this correction is crucial for standard English writing. "Non-substantial" functions as an adjective to describe something as insignificant or lacking importance. While the corrected phrase finds its use in various contexts, including formal and scientific writing, its absence in the provided examples underscores the importance of using the grammatically correct form. Always remember to include the hyphen to ensure clarity and accuracy in your writing.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

unimportant

A straightforward way to say something lacks importance.

insignificant

This alternative indicates a lack of importance or consequence.

minor

This term suggests something is small in size, degree, or importance.

negligible

Implies that something is so small or unimportant that it can be disregarded.

trivial

This suggests something is of little value or importance.

immaterial

Indicates that something is not relevant or important.

inconsiderable

Meaning something is not worth considering due to its small size or importance.

meager

Suggests a lack of quantity or substance.

limited

Indicates that something is restricted in amount, number, or extent.

modest

Implies something is humble or moderate in size or amount.

FAQs

What does "non-substantial" mean?

Non-substantial means not significant, considerable, or important. It describes something lacking in substance or weight.

How do I use "non-substantial" in a sentence?

You can use "non-substantial" to describe something that is minor or insignificant. For example: "The committee decided that the evidence presented was "non-substantial" and did not warrant further investigation."

What can I say instead of "non-substantial"?

You can use alternatives like "insignificant", "minor", or "negligible" depending on the context.

Which is correct, "non substantial" or "non-substantial"?

"Non-substantial" is the correct form. "Non substantial" is missing the hyphen and is grammatically incorrect.