resources to

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "resources to" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when referring to the allocation or provision of resources for a specific purpose or action. Example: "We need to allocate resources to improve our marketing strategy."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Formal & Business

Wiki

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

59 human-written examples

But it has the resources to respond.

The Economist

Students reported fewer resources to draw on.

The New York Times

Few have the financial resources to stay.

The Economist

There are resources to raise.

The New York Times

You need the resources to do it".

The New York Times

"They have few resources to draw on.

The New York Times

Resources to fight terrorism were limited, however.

The New York Times

They had the resources to do that.

The Guardian - Sport

"We have no resources to prevent it.

The New York Times - Sports

"Celtic have resources to compete in Europe.

The Guardian - Sport

Unlike them, he's got resources to burn.

The New York Times - Style

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When discussing resource allocation, be specific about the type of "resources" you are referring to (e.g., financial, human, technological) to provide clarity.

Common error

Avoid repetitive use of the word "resources" in close proximity. Vary your vocabulary by using synonyms like 'assets', 'funds', or 'capabilities' to enhance readability and avoid sounding monotonous.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "resources to" primarily functions as a noun phrase followed by an infinitive, indicating the availability of means or assets for a specific action or purpose. This aligns with Ludwig's assessment, which confirms its correctness and usability in English.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

40%

Science

25%

Formal & Business

15%

Less common in

Wiki

10%

Encyclopedias

5%

Social Media

5%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "resources to" is a grammatically sound and commonly used expression that indicates the availability of means for a specific action or purpose. As Ludwig AI confirms, it is correct and usable in written English. It appears frequently in News & Media, Science, and Formal & Business contexts. To enhance clarity, specify the type of "resources" and avoid overuse by incorporating synonyms like "funds for" or "assets for". This guide provides valuable insights into effectively using "resources to" in various writing scenarios.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

funds for

Replaces "resources" with "funds", emphasizing the financial aspect.

assets for

Substitutes "resources" with "assets", highlighting valuable possessions available for use.

means for

Replaces "resources" with "means", focusing on the methods or instruments available.

budget for

Specifies "budget" as the type of resource, indicating a financial plan.

capital for

Highlights "capital" as the resource, referring to financial assets used for investment or production.

capacity for

Replaces "resources" with "capacity", focusing on the ability to perform or produce.

provisions for

Substitutes "resources" with "provisions", suggesting supplies or arrangements made in advance.

wherewithal for

A more formal alternative to "resources", emphasizing the necessary means or supplies.

arrangements for

Replaces "resources" with "arrangements", focusing on plans and preparations.

infrastructure for

Specifies "infrastructure" as the type of resource, referring to basic physical and organizational structures.

FAQs

How can I use "resources to" in a sentence?

You can use "resources to" to indicate the availability of means for a specific purpose, such as "We need to allocate "funds to" improve our marketing strategy".

What are some alternatives to "resources to"?

Depending on the context, you could use alternatives like "funds for", "assets for", or "means for".

Is it grammatically correct to say "resources to"?

Yes, "resources to" is grammatically correct. It is often followed by a verb indicating the action the resources will be used for.

How does "resources to" differ from "resources for"?

"Resources to" is typically followed by a verb (e.g., "resources to invest"), indicating the resources will be used to do something. "Resources for" is followed by a noun (e.g., "resources for education"), indicating the resources are intended for something.