not comprehensive

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "not comprehensive" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to indicate that something does not cover all aspects or details of a subject. Example: "The report is informative, but it is not comprehensive and may leave out some key points."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Academia

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

Not comprehensive.

Yale University

These comparisons are not comprehensive.

The New York Times

The volume is not comprehensive.

The Economist

Coverage is not comprehensive.

Columbia University

Yet the regulatory crackdown is not comprehensive.

The New York Times

This list is not comprehensive.

Cornell University

The collection is not comprehensive.

Columbia University

The bag matching system is not comprehensive.

The New York Times

This list is illustrative and not comprehensive.

Cornell University

The content is supported by useful (though not comprehensive) bibliographies.

The Guardian - Books

The panorama is not comprehensive: a crucial scene is missing.

The New Yorker

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

In academic or formal writing, avoid using "not comprehensive" without suggesting areas for further research or development.

Common error

Don't assume your audience knows what is missing when you say something is "not comprehensive". Be explicit about the limitations or exclusions.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "not comprehensive" primarily functions as an adjective phrase, modifying a noun to indicate that something is incomplete or doesn't cover all aspects of a topic. As Ludwig AI confirms, it's a grammatically sound and frequently used expression.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

44%

Academia

29%

Science

27%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

1%

Formal & Business

0%

Wiki

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "not comprehensive" serves as an adjective phrase used to denote incompleteness or a limited scope. Ludwig AI confirms its grammatical correctness and frequent usage across diverse contexts, including news, academia, and science. As an authoritative expression, it is important to specify the areas that are lacking or excluded to ensure clarity and avoid ambiguity. Alternatives such as "not exhaustive" or "incomplete" may be used depending on the nuance desired. Being aware of the subtle differences and choosing the most appropriate substitute will enhance precision in conveying the intended meaning.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

not exhaustive

Emphasizes the lack of a complete listing or coverage.

not all-inclusive

Highlights that not everything is included or covered.

not complete

Directly states the lack of completeness.

lacking in scope

Focuses on the limited range or extent of coverage.

not thorough

Indicates a lack of detailed or careful treatment.

partially covered

Suggests that only a portion of the subject is addressed.

not extensive

Highlights the limited reach or scale.

incomplete

Simple and direct way of saying not complete.

superficial

Indicates a lack of depth or detailed analysis.

sketchy

Suggests a basic, possibly unreliable, overview.

FAQs

How can I use "not comprehensive" in a sentence?

You can use "not comprehensive" to indicate that something does not cover all aspects or details of a subject. For example, "The report is informative, but it is "not comprehensive" and may leave out some key points."

What can I say instead of "not comprehensive"?

You can use alternatives like "not exhaustive", "not all-inclusive", or "incomplete" depending on the context.

Is it better to say "not comprehensive" or "incomplete"?

Both "not comprehensive" and "incomplete" indicate a lack of completeness, but "not comprehensive" often suggests a broader scope that isn't fully covered, while "incomplete" implies something is missing. The best choice depends on the specific context.

What is the difference between "not comprehensive" and "superficial"?

"Not comprehensive" means that something does not cover all aspects or details. "Superficial", on the other hand, suggests a lack of depth or a shallow treatment of the subject matter.