should have received

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase 'should have received' is correct and usable in written English.
You can use this phrase when talking about something or someone that did not receive something they ought or needed to receive. Example: The students should have received their course syllabi weeks ago.

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Academia

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

He thought that Herivel should have received more credit.

The Guardian

It should have received the Immortal Gall Trophy.

The Guardian - Books

According to federal regulations, both women should have received assistance.

The New York Times

Under official guidelines, Siemens should have received an unsatisfactory rating.

The New York Times

You should have received expiration notifications via email.

University of California, Berkeley

You should have received an email with your score.

University of California, Berkeley

The guidelines suggested he should have received 10 to 16 months.

The New York Times

Federal sentencing guidelines suggested that he should have received 8 to 14 months.

The New York Times

However, the company's communications- fell short and it admits you should have received a letter.

The Guardian - Money

Social Security sent him $6,370.80, or $3,736.30 over what he should have received.

The New York Times

By law, they should have received an answer within seven days but have heard nothing.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "should have received", ensure the context clearly indicates why the subject was expected to receive something. For example, specify the agreement, regulation, or standard that was not met.

Common error

Avoid using "should have received" when "would have received" is more appropriate. "Should have" implies an obligation or expectation that was not met, while "would have" describes a hypothetical situation.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "should have received" is an auxiliary verb construction expressing expectation, obligation, or advisability in the past. It's commonly used to indicate that something was expected to be obtained but wasn't, as Ludwig's examples illustrate.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

48%

Academia

26%

Science

14%

Less common in

Wiki

2%

Formal & Business

10%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "should have received" is a versatile construction used to express missed expectations or obligations. Ludwig AI confirms its grammatical correctness and prevalence across diverse contexts, particularly in news, academic, and science domains. While it's generally appropriate for neutral and professional communication, writers should remain mindful of the subtle differences between this and related phrases like "ought to have been given" or "was supposed to get", to accurately convey the intended meaning. Remember to avoid the common mistake of using "should of" instead of "should have". By following these guidelines, you can confidently use this phrase in your writing.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

ought to have been given

Emphasizes moral obligation or duty in the act of giving, rather than the act of receiving.

should have been awarded

Refers specifically to prizes, honors, or recognitions that ought to have been given.

was entitled to receive

Highlights the legal or formal right to receive something.

was in line to receive

Indicates that someone met the requirements for something to be received.

was supposed to get

Conveys an expectation or arrangement that something would be received.

deserved to be given

Focuses on the deserving nature of the recipient, suggesting fairness or justice.

was due to receive

Indicates a scheduled or planned reception of something.

had a right to get

Highlights a justified expectation of receiving something.

could have been granted

Emphasizes the possibility or potential for something to be received.

might have obtained

Suggests uncertainty or speculation about whether something was received.

FAQs

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

Use "should have received" to express that someone was expected to get something, but they didn't. Example: "You "should have received" an email confirmation."

What does "should have received" imply?

"Should have received" implies that there was an expectation or requirement for someone to get something, but for some reason, they did not. It often suggests a mistake or failure.

Which is correct, "should have received" or "should of received"?

"Should have received" is the correct form. "Should of received" is a common error arising from mishearing "should've", which is a contraction of "should have".

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

Alternatives include "ought to have been given", "was entitled to receive", or "was supposed to get" depending on the specific nuance you want to convey.