was flawed

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "was flawed" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to describe something that had defects or shortcomings in the past. Example: "The initial design of the product was flawed, leading to numerous customer complaints."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

That Washington was flawed?

The New York Times - Arts

The stimulus was flawed.

The New York Times

But this logic was flawed.

The New York Times

Still, the process was flawed.

The New York Times

Worse, America's strategy was flawed.

The New Yorker

One bottle was flawed.

The New York Times - Food

"Gillard's judgment was flawed.

The Guardian

SABMiller said the analysis was flawed.

The Economist

The conclusion: its decision-making was flawed.

Independent

"It was flawed from the get-go".

The New York Times

"I laughed and said it was flawed.

The New Yorker

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "was flawed", ensure that the context clearly indicates what aspect was deficient or imperfect. Providing specific details will enhance clarity and prevent ambiguity.

Common error

Avoid using "was flawed" without specifying the nature of the flaw. For instance, instead of saying "the plan was flawed", specify how it was flawed, such as "the plan was flawed due to unrealistic budget assumptions".

Linguistic Context

The phrase "was flawed" functions as a descriptive adjective phrase, indicating that something possessed imperfections or weaknesses in the past. This is supported by Ludwig AI, which confirms its correctness and usability. The phrase modifies a noun or pronoun, providing information about its state or quality.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

95%

Science

3%

Formal & Business

1%

Less common in

Wiki

1%

Encyclopedias

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "was flawed" is a grammatically sound and frequently employed expression used to describe something that had imperfections or deficiencies in the past. Ludwig AI confirms its usability across various contexts, particularly in news and media. When employing this phrase, be sure to specify the nature of the flaw to enhance clarity. Alternatives such as "was defective" or "had shortcomings" can be used to provide a slightly different nuance. Given its widespread use and clear meaning, "was flawed" is a reliable choice for conveying that something had imperfections.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

was defective

Indicates a specific fault or imperfection affecting its proper function.

was imperfect

Suggests a general lack of perfection, without necessarily implying a major fault.

was deficient

Highlights a lack of something essential or necessary.

was faulty

Similar to defective, but can also imply an error in design or construction.

was not perfect

A more general way of saying something had issues, without focusing on specific problems.

had shortcomings

Emphasizes the presence of limitations or weaknesses.

was not up to par

Suggests that something didn't meet the expected standard or level of quality.

was less than ideal

A more understated way to indicate issues without directly criticizing.

contained errors

Focuses specifically on the presence of mistakes or inaccuracies.

was not without its faults

Highlights that something had both good and bad aspects, acknowledging the negative.

FAQs

How can I use "was flawed" in a sentence?

You can use "was flawed" to describe something that had defects or imperfections in the past. For example, "The initial design of the product "was flawed", leading to numerous customer complaints."

What can I say instead of "was flawed"?

You can use alternatives like "was defective", "was imperfect", or "had shortcomings" depending on the context.

Is it correct to say "was flawed"?

Yes, the phrase "was flawed" is grammatically correct and commonly used in written English to describe something that had defects or imperfections.

What's the difference between "was flawed" and "contained errors"?

"Was flawed" implies a more general imperfection or deficiency, while "contained errors" specifically refers to the presence of mistakes or inaccuracies. The best choice depends on the specific context.