was devoid of

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "was devoid of" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to indicate the absence of something, often in a formal or literary context. Example: "The landscape was devoid of any signs of life, creating an eerie atmosphere."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

55 human-written examples

The sea was devoid of life.

The New Yorker

Today, the brig was devoid of prisoners.

The New Yorker

I was devoid of emotion".

The Guardian

Mr. Boehner's speech was devoid of both.

The New York Times

The first half was devoid of footballing haymakers.

The Guardian - Sport

Strength encourages peace"—and was devoid of novel ideas.

The New Yorker

On this day, though, the flat was devoid of fish.

The New York Times - Sports

Tonight's speech was devoid of new initiatives in that area.

The New York Times

He was devoid of guile and incapable of envy.

The Guardian

Strength encourages peace" — and was devoid of novel ideas.

The New Yorker

Barry Tompkins's blow-by-blow calling was devoid of excitement and too often embraced silence.

The New York Times - Sports

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "was devoid of" when you want to emphasize a complete absence of something, especially in formal or descriptive writing. It adds a touch of elegance and precision.

Common error

Avoid using "was devoid of" in casual conversation or informal writing, as it can sound overly formal or pretentious. Opt for simpler alternatives like "lacked" or "didn't have".

Linguistic Context

The phrase "was devoid of" functions as a descriptive adjective phrase. It modifies a noun by stating that it is completely lacking a particular quality or element. As Ludwig AI indicates, the phrase is correct and usable in written English.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

51%

Science

44%

Wiki

3%

Less common in

Formal & Business

2%

Social Media

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "was devoid of" is a grammatically correct and frequently used way to express the complete absence of something. Ludwig AI confirms its validity and usability. While primarily found in News & Media and Science, it maintains a neutral to formal register. When using this phrase, remember to consider your audience and the overall tone of your writing to ensure it's the most appropriate choice. Alternatives like "lacked" or "was without" can be suitable for more casual contexts.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

lacked

A direct synonym indicating the absence of something. It's often more concise than the original phrase.

was absent of

Similar in meaning but slightly more formal than "was devoid of".

was without

A simple and straightforward alternative, emphasizing the absence of a particular element.

contained no

Focuses on the absence of something within a specific container or entity.

had no

A more informal option, suitable for everyday language.

did not have

Another common and less formal alternative.

was missing

Emphasizes that something is not present when it should be.

failed to include

Highlights a deliberate omission or oversight.

presented no

Focuses on a lack of presentation or display of something.

offered no

Implies a lack of provision or supply.

FAQs

What does "was devoid of" mean?

The phrase "was devoid of" means that something completely lacked a particular quality or element. It indicates a total absence.

What can I say instead of "was devoid of"?

You can use alternatives like "lacked", "was without", or "had no" depending on the context.

Is it correct to say "is devoid of"?

Yes, it is correct to say "is devoid of". The verb tense changes depending on the subject and the time frame you are referring to. "Was devoid of" refers to the past, while "is devoid of" refers to the present.

When is it appropriate to use "was devoid of" in writing?

The phrase "was devoid of" is appropriate for formal or descriptive writing when you want to emphasize a complete absence. However, in more casual contexts, simpler alternatives might be more suitable.