smallest with

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "smallest with" is not correct and does not convey a clear meaning in written English.
It may be used in contexts where you are comparing sizes or quantities, but it typically requires additional context to be meaningful. Example: "This is the smallest with the highest quality among the options available."

⚠ May contain grammatical issues

News & Media

Science

Encyclopedias

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

59 human-written examples

(The smallest, with chain, $275).

The New York Times

The smallest, with its pitched roof, stands at a wonky angle.

The Guardian - Arts

It's also the smallest, with just 1,000 or so students on campus.

The Guardian

FOULA SCHOOL, SHETLAND ISLANDS As well as the most remote, it's also one of the smallest, with just three pupils.

The Guardian - Travel

The Franklin Mutual Financial Services fund, the smallest, with just $310 million in assets, gained 32.3percentt.

The New York Times

The three pots each had different markings, the smallest with a 'V' to indicate 'measure' and three long strokes.

The Economist

Lipoproteins of this class are the smallest, with a diameter of 10.8 nm and the highest protein-to-lipid ratio.

Encyclopedia Britannica

Utrecht, provincie, central Netherlands, the country's smallest, with an area of 514 square miles (1,331 square km).

Encyclopedia Britannica

But there has been hardly any campaigning in what remains the most solidly Democratic state in the nation, and the 10th smallest, with just four electoral votes.

The New York Times

Although about 70 lawyers work for Farrell Fritz at its three locations, the Bridgehampton office is the smallest, with just 3 full-time lawyers.

The New York Times

It is probably also one of the most intimate institutions, being the only one-house, nonpartisan legislature in the nation, and also the smallest with only 49 members.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When comparing sizes or amounts, consider replacing "smallest with" with a more grammatically sound phrase like "smallest in" or "smallest among" for clarity and correctness.

Common error

Avoid using "smallest with" without careful consideration of grammatical alternatives. In many cases, "smallest of", "smallest among", or rephrasing the sentence can improve clarity and correctness.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "smallest with" functions as an adjective phrase modifying a noun, often aiming to specify the size and an associated attribute or characteristic. However, as Ludwig AI points out, the construction is not grammatically sound and requires careful consideration.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

Science

32%

News & Media

30%

Encyclopedias

6%

Less common in

Wiki

2%

Formal & Business

2%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, while the phrase "smallest with" appears frequently across various sources, Ludwig AI identifies it as grammatically questionable. Its function is to describe an item's size in relation to an attribute, but more precise alternatives like "smallest among" or "smallest of" are recommended, especially in formal writing. The phrase is most commonly found in scientific and news contexts. While widely used, careful consideration of grammatical correctness is crucial.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

least with

Substitutes "smallest" with "least", focusing on the minimal quantity or degree associated with something.

tiniest alongside

Replaces "smallest" with "tiniest", emphasizing diminutive size, and "with" with "alongside", indicating co-location or comparison.

lowest accompanying

Uses "lowest" instead of "smallest", referring to numerical value or level, and "accompanying" instead of "with", implying presence together.

littlest accompanied by

Uses "littlest" instead of "smallest" for emphasis on smallness, and "accompanied by" instead of "with", indicating association.

slightest involving

Replaces "smallest" with "slightest", focusing on a minor degree, and "with" with "involving", indicating inclusion or participation.

minimal in conjunction with

Replaces "smallest" with "minimal", emphasizing a reduced state, and "with" with "in conjunction with", indicating a combined effect.

the most reduced paired with

Replaces "smallest" with "the most reduced", focusing on a size reduction, and "with" with "paired with", indicating an association or connection.

narrowest including

Substitutes "smallest" with "narrowest", focusing on width, and "with" with "including", indicating containment or addition.

diminutive featuring

Replaces "smallest" with "diminutive", highlighting a reduced size, and "with" with "featuring", indicating a prominent characteristic.

compact incorporating

Uses "compact" instead of "smallest", focusing on space efficiency, and "incorporating" instead of "with", implying integration.

FAQs

Is "smallest with" grammatically correct?

While commonly used, "smallest with" is often considered grammatically questionable. It's advisable to use alternatives such as "smallest of" or "smallest among" for better clarity and correctness.

What are some alternatives to "smallest with"?

Alternatives include "smallest among", "smallest of", or rephrasing the sentence to use a more precise construction. For example, instead of "the smallest with a chain", try "the smallest, which includes a chain".

How can I use "smallest among" instead of "smallest with"?

Instead of saying "This is the smallest with the highest quality", you can say "This is the "smallest among" those with the highest quality" or "This is the smallest of the options with the highest quality".

When is it appropriate to use "smallest with"?

While generally discouraged, "smallest with" might be acceptable in informal contexts where the meaning is clear. However, in formal writing, it's best to opt for grammatically correct alternatives such as "smallest of" or "smallest among".