sets with

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "sets with" is not correct and is not usable in written English.
To make a sentence with the same meaning, you could use "goes with," as in "This shirt sets goes with this pair of shorts."

⚠ May contain grammatical issues

News & Media

Science

Wiki

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

56 human-written examples

Scrabble sets with platinum boards?

The New York Times

Sanguinetti won both sets with aces.

The New York Times - Sports

Two sets with two discs each, $29.99 a set.

The New York Times

Tuesdays bring acoustic sets, with biweekly open-mike nights.

The New York Times

"And I prefer building sets with instructions," Richard continued.

The Guardian - Lifestyle

He trades sets with the singer Adalberto Santiago.

The New York Times

Take fractals, mathematical structures or sets with intermediate dimensionality.

The New York Times - Science

Danish artisans hoisted sets with intricate string and pulley mechanisms.

The New York Times - Arts

Customers are rushing to buy TV sets with flat screens.

The Economist

You won't find inexpensive smaller sets with the feature, but there are a few widescreen, flat-panel sets with CableCard slots.

The New York Times - Tech

Serena won in three sets, with Venus often struggling to move at full speed.

The New York Times - Sports

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Avoid using the phrase "sets with" in formal writing due to its grammatical incorrectness. Opt for alternatives like "sets that include" or "sets featuring" for clarity.

Common error

Writers often mistakenly use "sets with" when they intend to describe the contents or attributes of a set. To avoid this, use prepositions like "of" or "containing", or rephrase to use verbs like "include" or "feature".

Linguistic Context

The phrase "sets with" functions as a descriptive element, attempting to specify the contents or characteristics of a set. However, as Ludwig AI points out, this construction is grammatically incorrect. It often appears where a relative clause or a different preposition would be more appropriate.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

37%

Science

35%

Wiki

5%

Less common in

Formal & Business

0%

Academia

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, while the phrase "sets with" appears frequently across various sources, including news, media, and scientific publications, it's important to recognize that it's grammatically incorrect. Ludwig AI highlights that better alternatives, such as "sets that include" or "sets featuring", provide clarity and grammatical correctness. Therefore, in formal writing, avoid using "sets with" and opt for more appropriate phrases to accurately describe the contents or attributes of a set. Remember that grammatical accuracy enhances the credibility and clarity of your writing.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

includes

Directly states that the sets contain something, removing the preposition 'with'.

goes with

Indicates items that are typically used or found together, emphasizing compatibility.

groups with

Focuses on the act of forming sets or categories, rather than the sets themselves.

teams with

Replaces 'sets' with 'teams', altering the context to focus on collaborative groups rather than collections.

combines with

This alternative emphasizes the action of joining or merging items, which is conceptually similar to grouping.

incorporates

Highlights the action of including elements within a set, with a slightly more formal tone.

pairs with

Suggests a deliberate matching or association, focusing on relationships between items.

features

Emphasizes the attributes or elements that a set possesses, shifting the focus to characteristics.

matches with

Highlights the compatibility or correspondence between items.

integrates with

Emphasizes the process of incorporating one thing into another, useful in technical or abstract contexts.

FAQs

What is a grammatically correct alternative to "sets with"?

Instead of "sets with", you can use phrases like "sets that include", "sets containing", or "sets featuring" depending on the intended meaning.

How can I rephrase a sentence using "sets with" to be more grammatically sound?

Consider restructuring your sentence to use a verb that accurately describes the relationship. For example, instead of "The sets with problems", try "The sets that include problems" or "The sets featuring problems".

In what contexts might I encounter the phrase "sets with", and why should I avoid it?

You might encounter "sets with" in informal contexts, but it's best to avoid it in formal writing. It's often used when describing the contents or characteristics of a set, but there are more grammatically correct alternatives, such as "includes" or "featuring".

What's the difference between saying "sets with" and "sets that include"?

"Sets with" is grammatically incorrect, whereas "sets that include" is a correct relative clause that clearly indicates what the sets contain. The latter provides a clear and grammatically sound description.