was equal to

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase 'was equal to' is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it when there is a comparison between two quantities or ideas. For example: The cost of the meal was equal to the cost of a movie ticket.

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

News & Media

Academia

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

But Sir John was equal to that.

The Economist

(Dutch taste was equal to Dutch talent).

The New Yorker

Schilling was equal to the task.

The New York Times - Sports

ΔK was equal to this, that's equal to all that.

Yale University

That was equal to about half the annual harvest.

The New York Times

This year's average was equal to the 2006 average.

The New York Times

Hussey was equal to both modes of England's attack.

The Guardian - Sport

Okayo's time was equal to the fourth fastest ever.

The New York Times - Sports

The coefficient R2 was equal to 0.4142 for house connections.

Engineering Failure Analysis

The quantum yield was equal to 31% and the optical band gap energy was equal to 4.26 eV.

Journal of Colloid and Interface Science

The volume fraction of particles was equal to 11.5%.

Composites Part B: Engineering

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "was equal to" when you want to clearly state that two values, amounts, or concepts have the same magnitude or significance. Ensure both elements being compared are clearly defined for the reader.

Common error

Avoid using "was equal to" when you simply mean 'was' or 'is'. The phrase is specifically for comparisons; using it otherwise can make your writing sound unnatural or grammatically incorrect.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "was equal to" functions as a linking phrase used to establish a mathematical or conceptual equivalence between two entities. Ludwig AI confirms this phrase is correct, offering numerous examples of its usage across various contexts.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

Science

53%

News & Media

31%

Academia

5%

Less common in

Formal & Business

2%

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "was equal to" is a common and grammatically sound phrase used to denote equivalence between two entities. Ludwig AI affirms its correctness, showcasing diverse examples across science, news, and academic domains. While versatile, it should be used precisely in comparative contexts, avoiding redundancy. Alternatives such as "equaled" or "amounted to" may offer conciseness in certain situations. By understanding its function and appropriate usage, you can effectively communicate equality in your writing.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

equaled

A more concise verb form indicating equality, omitting the auxiliary "was" and preposition "to".

was equivalent to

A slightly more formal synonym, emphasizing functional equivalence.

was identical to

Emphasizes a complete and exact likeness, stronger than simply "equal".

was the same as

A simpler, more direct way to express equality, suitable for informal contexts.

amounted to

Indicates a total or sum, often used in numerical contexts.

corresponded to

Similar to 'matched' but often used for more abstract or complex relationships.

totaled

A specific term for numerical equivalence, often used when summing values.

matched

Implies a direct correspondence or mirroring between two things.

constituted

Indicates that something makes up or forms a whole, implying a quantitative or compositional equality.

represented

Indicates that one thing stands for or is a symbol of another, implying equality in value or meaning within a given system.

FAQs

How can I use "was equal to" in a sentence?

The phrase "was equal to" is used to show that two things have the same value or amount. For example, "The result of the experiment "was equal to" the predicted outcome."

What are some alternatives to saying "was equal to"?

Depending on the context, you can use phrases like "was equivalent to", "amounted to", or "equaled" as alternatives to "was equal to".

Is it correct to say "is equal to" instead of "was equal to"?

Yes, "is equal to" is correct when referring to a current state or general truth, while "was equal to" refers to a past state. For example, "The sum of these numbers is equal to 10" (current) versus "The sum of those numbers "was equal to" 10 last year" (past).

What's the difference between "was equal to" and "was similar to"?

"Was equal to" indicates an exact equivalence in value or amount. "Was similar to" indicates that two things shared characteristics but were not exactly the same. For example, "The outcome "was equal to" the prediction" (exact match) versus "The outcome was similar to the prediction" (close, but not exact).