was limited in scope

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "was limited in scope" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to describe something that has a narrow focus or restricted range of applicability. Example: "The study was limited in scope, focusing only on a specific demographic group."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Formal & Business

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

44 human-written examples

"But let's say it did: it was limited in scope".

The New York Times

The statement said that the episode "was limited in scope, involved systems which host publicly available information" and that no personal or confidential business information had been compromised.

The New York Times

The search warrant served Thursday was limited in scope, consistent with a subpoena that was issued for specimens and test results for a handful of players, said Samuels, the Quest spokesman.

The New York Times - Sports

Maybe he would have been more interested if it had been possible to play with it the way you can now, but back then it was limited in scope.

The Guardian - Arts

Toulson agreed with HRMC that the information shared by Hartnett was limited in scope, but said it was not insignificant given the use the newspaper articles made of it.

The Guardian

It was limited in scope, and insufficient data existed to calculate many of the government's assets and liabilities, but it was an important start to providing a complete picture of federal indebtedness.

The New York Times

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

13 human-written examples

"The theory," says Cranmer, "is limited in scope".

The New Yorker

"It's limited in scope, but the State of Illinois is absolutely doing the right thing".

The New York Times

Previous efforts to audit E-Rate have uncovered problems, but those efforts were limited in scope.

The New York Times

Finally, YouTube's Content ID tool is limited in scope and imperfect.

The Guardian - Music

Past Presidents, including Barack Obama, have issued similar orders, but theirs tended to be limited in scope.

The New Yorker

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "was limited in scope", clearly state what the limitations were. This provides context and avoids ambiguity. For instance, instead of saying "The research was limited in scope", say "The research "was limited in scope", focusing only on participants aged 65 and over".

Common error

Avoid exaggerating the importance of something that "was limited in scope". Acknowledge its limitations to maintain credibility and avoid misleading your audience. It's important to be honest about what something can and cannot achieve.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "was limited in scope" functions as a descriptive element, often qualifying a noun or a situation. As Ludwig AI confirms, it is grammatically sound. Examples show it used to describe research, investigations, and governmental actions.

Expression frequency: Common

Frequent in

News & Media

44%

Science

44%

Formal & Business

8%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

1%

Wiki

1%

Reference

1%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "was limited in scope" is a grammatically correct and commonly used expression to describe something with restricted boundaries or a narrow focus. Ludwig AI analysis confirms its validity. It appears frequently in news, scientific, and formal business contexts. When using this phrase, it's important to clearly state what the limitations are to avoid ambiguity. While there are several alternatives, the best choice depends on the specific context and nuance you wish to convey.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

was restricted in extent

Focuses on the degree or range being small.

was narrow in focus

Emphasizes a specific and restricted subject or area.

was circumscribed in application

Highlights that the use is defined by boundaries or limits.

was bounded in range

Implies a defined and limited area or scale.

was finite in reach

Emphasizes that something only affects a certain area or number of people.

had a specific boundary

Indicates a clear and defined limit to something.

was confined in its operation

Focuses on the functional aspect of something being restricted.

was local in effect

Points out that something only had an influence on a small geographical area.

was regional in character

Highlights that something is specific to one region.

was insular in nature

Implies a characteristic of being isolated and restricted within itself.

FAQs

What does "was limited in scope" mean?

The phrase "was limited in scope" means that something had a restricted or narrow focus, range, or application. It indicates that the subject in question did not cover a broad area or all aspects of a topic.

How can I use "was limited in scope" in a sentence?

You can use "was limited in scope" to describe a study, investigation, or project that had specific constraints or boundaries. For example, "The study "was limited in scope" to urban areas only."

What are some alternatives to "was limited in scope"?

Some alternatives to "was limited in scope" include "was restricted in extent", "was narrow in focus", or "was circumscribed in application". The best choice depends on the specific context.

Is it better to say "had a limited scope" or "was limited in scope"?

Both "had a limited scope" and "was limited in scope" are grammatically correct and convey the same meaning. The choice between them often comes down to stylistic preference. "Was limited in scope" is more passive, while "had a limited scope" is more active.