was merged with

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "was merged with" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to describe the process of combining two or more entities into one, often in contexts like business, technology, or data management. Example: "The two companies were merged with the aim of creating a more competitive organization in the market."

✓ Grammatically correct

Encyclopedias

News & Media

Science

Academia

Wiki

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

G The file was merged with changes from the repository.

University of California, Berkeley

At that time, Piedmont was merged with another company.

Harvard Business Review

Firstar was merged with First American in September.

The New York Times

In 2010 the village of Rohr was merged with Aarau.

Encyclopedia Britannica

It was merged with Himachal Pradesh in 1948.

Encyclopedia Britannica

The area was merged with Madhya Pradesh in 1956.

Encyclopedia Britannica

The Lasswell category "Food" was merged with the P category of the same name.

Harvard University

Declared a town in 1890, Mount Morgan was merged with the shire of Calliungal in 1931.

Britannica

Mr. Schick was president of Piedmont during the period it was merged with USAir in 1988.

The New York Times

It was merged with Infrastructure UK in 2016 and renamed as the Infrastructure and Projects Authority.

The Guardian

In the early 1960's, Reflectone was merged with the Universal Match Company.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "was merged with" when you want to emphasize that two distinct entities have been combined into a single, unified entity. It's particularly useful in describing organizational restructuring, data integration, or historical unions.

Common error

Avoid using "was merged with" when you simply mean that something was added to something else without creating a new, unified entity. "Added to" or "combined with" might be more appropriate in such cases.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "was merged with" functions as a passive construction, indicating that a subject underwent a process of combination or integration. As Ludwig AI confirms, it correctly portrays the union of distinct entities, as shown in Ludwig's examples.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

Science

20%

News & Media

20%

Encyclopedias

17%

Less common in

Academia

10%

Wiki

10%

Formal & Business

8%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "was merged with" is a grammatically sound and frequently used phrase signifying the combination of two or more entities into one. As indicated by Ludwig AI, the phrase is widely applicable across various contexts, including news, encyclopedias, science, and academia. Alternatives such as "was combined with" or "was integrated with" may be more appropriate depending on the specific context. Avoid using "was merged with" when simply meaning something was added without creating a unified whole. Understanding these nuances will help ensure accurate and effective communication.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

was consolidated with

Implies a stronger sense of uniting and strengthening the combined entity.

was integrated with

Focuses on making the combined elements work together effectively.

was united with

Suggests a joining of forces or interests.

was combined with

A more general term for putting two or more things together.

was incorporated into

Implies a more formal inclusion into a larger structure.

was assimilated into

Suggests that one element is absorbed into another, losing its individual identity.

was fused with

Implies a complete blending of elements, often irreversible.

was blended with

Similar to 'fused with' but can suggest a more gradual combination.

was admixed with

Often used in scientific contexts to describe mixing substances.

was coupled with

Indicates a joining of two things, often where one depends on the other.

FAQs

How can I use "was merged with" in a sentence?

You can use "was merged with" to describe the combination of two or more entities into a single one. For example, "The two departments "were merged with" the goal of improving efficiency."

What are some alternatives to "was merged with"?

Alternatives include "was combined with", "was integrated with", or "was consolidated with", depending on the specific context and nuance you want to convey.

Is it correct to say "were merged with" instead of "was merged with"?

Yes, use "were merged with" when referring to multiple subjects. For example, "The two companies "were merged with" each other."

What is the difference between "was merged with" and "was acquired by"?

"Was merged with" implies a more equal combination of entities, while "was acquired by" indicates that one entity has been taken over by another, often suggesting a difference in power or size. For example, a small company "was acquired by" a major corporation.