was immaterial

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "was immaterial" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to indicate that something is irrelevant or not significant in a particular context. Example: "The evidence presented in court was immaterial to the case and did not influence the jury's decision."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Academia

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

It was immaterial.

The New Yorker

Sunil's being Bengali was immaterial to me.

The New York Times - Arts

But it was immaterial to her.

The Guardian

With credentials like that, weather was immaterial.

The New York Times - Sports

In one way, the result Tuesday was immaterial.

The New York Times - Sports

It was immaterial that Mr. Fredenberg was unarmed.

The New York Times

His shot bounced off the rim, but that was immaterial.

The New York Times - Sports

How many front pages you could get was immaterial.

The Guardian

By close of play this background chatter was immaterial.

The Guardian - Sport

However, the judge also argued that the boy's immigration status was immaterial.

The Washington Post

"Charlie suggested it was immaterial what people like him or me did.

The Guardian

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "was immaterial" to clearly indicate that a piece of information or a factor does not affect the outcome or is not worth considering in a particular situation.

Common error

Avoid using "was immaterial" when expressing a subjective opinion or personal preference. This phrase is best suited for objective statements about relevance or significance. For subjective opinions, consider alternatives like "I didn't care for it" or "it didn't appeal to me".

Linguistic Context

The phrase "was immaterial" functions as a predicate adjective, describing the subject as lacking substance or relevance. Ludwig's examples show its use in deeming certain facts, arguments, or considerations as unimportant to the main issue.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

58%

Academia

21%

Science

9%

Less common in

Formal & Business

7%

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "was immaterial" is a grammatically correct and frequently used expression that signifies something is irrelevant or lacks significance. As Ludwig AI indicates, it functions as a predicate adjective and is employed to dismiss details that do not affect the outcome. Its register is neutral, making it suitable for both formal and informal contexts, with a strong presence in news and academic writing. While numerous alternatives exist, such as "was irrelevant" and "was unimportant", "was immaterial" offers a precise way to convey that a factor should not be considered.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

was irrelevant

Direct synonym, focusing on the lack of relevance.

was insignificant

Highlights the lack of importance or consequence.

was inconsequential

Emphasizes that something had no effect or impact.

was unimportant

Focuses on the lack of importance.

was beside the point

Indicates that something is off-topic or not pertinent.

was of no consequence

Stresses the lack of importance regarding the result.

was of little importance

Highlights a low degree of importance.

was negligible

Emphasizes the minimal impact or effect.

was trivial

Highlights the pettiness or paltriness of something.

didn't matter

A more colloquial way of expressing a lack of importance.

FAQs

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

Use "was immaterial" to indicate that something is irrelevant or insignificant to a particular situation. For example: "The defendant's alibi, while interesting, "was immaterial" to the evidence presented."

What are some alternatives to using "was immaterial"?

You can use alternatives like "was irrelevant", "was unimportant", or "was insignificant" depending on the context.

Is it always appropriate to use "was immaterial" in formal writing?

Yes, "was immaterial" is generally appropriate for formal writing. It provides a clear and concise way to express that something lacks relevance or significance. However, ensure that the context warrants its use and that it's not used to dismiss valid concerns or information.

What's the difference between ""was immaterial"" and "was irrelevant"?

While similar, ""was immaterial"" often implies a lack of consequence or impact on the final outcome. "Was irrelevant" simply means that it's not related to the topic being discussed.