should have included

USAGE SUMMARY

"should have included" is correct and can be used in written English.
It is used to express regret or disappointment that something was not included. For example: I'm sorry I forgot to include my contact information in the email. I should have included it in the first place.

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

57 human-written examples

It should have included a blue pencil.

The New York Times - Arts

Are there any we should have included?

The Guardian - Tech

I think he should have included New York.

The New York Times

Which houses do you think we should have included?

The Guardian - Lifestyle

Ms. Gerston's article should have included comments from Nathaniel Branden.

The New York Times - Books

In fairness the article should have included a response from Mr. Romano.

The New York Times

Also you should have included "pesky" and "dirt dog" here to win "Talking About Pedroia" bingo.

The Guardian - Sport

A book as stuffed with minor characters as "Union 1812" should have included one more.

The New York Times - Books

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

3 human-written examples

The recipe should have included 1 teaspoon of baking soda.

Los Angeles Times

And then, of course, one has to mention the poets I might have/should have included on my list.

The Guardian - Books

Is there anyone we should have included?

Vice

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "should have included" when critiquing or evaluating a piece of work or plan where the absence of something is a notable oversight, such as in reviews or reports.

Common error

Avoid using "should have included" when you mean "should include". The former refers to a past action that was not taken, while the latter is a recommendation for a current or future action.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "should have included" functions as a modal verb phrase expressing advisability or obligation in retrospect. It's used to indicate that something was necessary, beneficial, or expected to be part of a previous action or situation. Ludwig's examples showcase its use in various contexts.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

51%

Science

24%

Wiki

7%

Less common in

Formal & Business

6%

Academia

3%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "should have included" is a versatile phrase used to express regret or suggest that something was missing in a past action or situation. As confirmed by Ludwig, it is grammatically correct and widely used. Its function is to offer constructive criticism or suggestions, making it suitable for various contexts. Its frequent occurrence in news and media sources suggests its broad applicability. Remember to use "should have included" to refer to past actions and avoid confusing it with "should include", which is for present or future actions. Mastering this phrase can enhance clarity and precision in your writing.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

ought to have included

Replaces "should" with "ought to", conveying a slightly stronger sense of obligation.

needed to include

Focuses on the necessity of including something rather than expressing regret.

was necessary to include

Emphasizes the requirement of inclusion, altering the sentence structure.

it would have been better to include

Adds a layer of subjective judgment about the inclusion.

it was advisable to include

Highlights the prudence of including something, changing the tone slightly.

inclusion would have been beneficial

Shifts the focus to the benefits of including something, rather than the act itself.

failed to include

Indicates a simple omission without necessarily implying regret.

omitted from

Highlights the act of leaving something out, often in a more formal context.

left out of

A more informal way of saying something was not included.

was missing from

States that something was absent, focusing on the state of incompleteness.

FAQs

How to use "should have included" in a sentence?

"Should have included" is used to express regret or suggest that something was missing. For example, "The report should have included data from the last quarter."

What can I say instead of "should have included"?

You can use alternatives like "ought to have included", "needed to include", or "was necessary to include" depending on the context.

Which is correct, "should have included" or "should include"?

"Should have included" refers to something that was not included in the past, while "should include" is a recommendation for present or future inclusion. The correct choice depends on the intended meaning.

What's the difference between "should have included" and "failed to include"?

"Should have included" implies a suggestion or regret that something was omitted, whereas "failed to include" simply states the omission without necessarily implying regret.