ring of truth

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "ring of truth" is correct and commonly used in written English.
It is typically used to describe something that seems believable or genuine. Example: "Her story had a ring of truth to it, and the jury was convinced of her innocence."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Film

Books

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

But it carried a ring of truth.

The Economist

His complaints had the ring of truth.

The New York Times - Books

It's lost the ring of truth.

The Guardian - Film

But it has the ring of truth.

The New York Times

Jawad's account had the ring of truth.

The New York Times

All these have a ring of truth.

The Guardian - Film

Some believe that it has the ring of truth.

Independent

There is another, however, that has a ring of truth.

The New York Times - Sports

Even then, the film's ring of truth still works.

The New York Times

"Well, that does have the ring of truth," he said.

The New York Times

Harsh judgment, but with a searing ring of truth.

The New York Times - Sports

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use the phrase "ring of truth" when you want to emphasize that something appears to be genuine and believable based on its inherent qualities or the way it is presented.

Common error

Avoid presenting something as having a "ring of truth" if you intend to convey that it is definitively and absolutely true. The phrase suggests an impression of truth, not a guarantee.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "ring of truth" functions as a noun phrase that typically serves as a subject complement or an object of a preposition. It describes the quality of something (a statement, story, explanation) that makes it appear believable or genuine, as confirmed by Ludwig.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

64%

Film

15%

Formal & Business

7%

Less common in

Books

5%

Science

4%

Academia

1%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "ring of truth" is a common and grammatically sound expression used to describe something that seems believable or genuine. Ludwig's AI confirms its correctness and widespread usage. It frequently appears in News & Media sources, suggesting its utility in conveying impressions of authenticity in reports and discussions. While not a guarantee of absolute truth, the phrase indicates a strong sense of veracity, making it a valuable tool in communication. When writing, ensure that the context aligns with the intended nuance of perceived truth rather than definitive fact.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

air of credibility

Highlights the quality of being believable or trustworthy.

feeling of genuineness

Emphasizes the sincerity and honesty conveyed.

sense of authenticity

Focuses on the genuine quality or character of something.

carried conviction

Highlights the power and forcefulness with which something was believed or expressed.

impression of veracity

Stresses the accuracy and truthfulness perceived.

had the hallmarks of truth

Suggests that something exhibited clear signs or characteristics of being true.

held up to scrutiny

Indicates that something remained truthful even under close examination.

sound of honesty

Focuses on the audible or perceptible quality of truthfulness.

resonated as genuine

Emphasizes the authentic and sincere quality that connected with others.

seemed plausible

Indicates that something appeared reasonable or believable.

FAQs

How can I use "ring of truth" in a sentence?

You can use "ring of truth" to describe statements, stories, or explanations that seem believable. For instance, "His alibi had a "ring of truth", so the police decided to investigate further."

What's a good alternative to "ring of truth"?

Alternatives include phrases like "air of credibility", "sense of authenticity", or "feeling of genuineness", depending on the specific nuance you want to convey.

Is it better to say "ring of truth" or "kernel of truth"?

"Ring of truth" suggests an overall impression of believability, while "kernel of truth" implies that there's a small element of truth within something that's largely untrue or exaggerated. The choice depends on the specific context.

What does it mean when something doesn't have a "ring of truth"?

If something doesn't have a "ring of truth", it means it seems implausible, insincere, or fabricated. It lacks the qualities that would make it believable or trustworthy.