was not identified

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "was not identified" is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it when you want to indicate that something, or someone, was not recognized or not able to be identified. For example, "The culprit was not identified by CCTV footage".

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Academia

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

54 human-written examples

He was not identified.

The New York Times

The officer was not identified.

The New Yorker

The gunman was not identified.

The New York Times

That person was not identified.

The New Yorker

The vendor was not identified.

The New York Times

The witness was not identified.

The New York Times

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

6 human-written examples

You are not identified".

The New York Times

Damping is not identified.

Journal of Sound and Vibration

(The artists were not identified).

The New York Times

The buyers were not identified.

The New York Times

The programs were not identified.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "was not identified" when you want to clearly state that a person, object, or piece of information could not be determined or specified. This phrasing avoids ambiguity.

Common error

While "was not identified" is grammatically sound, overuse can lead to passive voice. Consider active alternatives if appropriate to make your writing more direct. For instance, instead of "The source was not identified", you might say "Investigators could not identify the source".

Linguistic Context

The phrase "was not identified" functions as a passive construction indicating that the identity of something or someone is unknown or has not been revealed. As confirmed by Ludwig AI, this is a correct and usable phrase in written English.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

78%

Science

12%

Academia

5%

Less common in

Formal & Business

3%

Encyclopedias

1%

Wiki

1%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "was not identified" is a grammatically correct and frequently used passive construction that indicates the unknown or unrevealed identity of a subject. As Ludwig AI confirms, this phrase is perfectly suitable for written English. Predominantly found in news and media contexts, the phrase serves to convey a lack of specific information while maintaining a neutral tone. When using this phrase, writers should be mindful of overusing the passive voice and consider active alternatives where appropriate to enhance clarity and directness. The high frequency and diverse application across authoritative sources, such as The New York Times and The New Yorker, underscore its reliability and widespread acceptance.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

remained unidentified

Focuses on the state of being unidentified over a period.

was not named

Emphasizes the absence of a specific name being given.

was not disclosed

Highlights the withholding of information about the identity.

was kept anonymous

Indicates a deliberate effort to conceal the identity.

was unconfirmed

Suggests that the identity could not be verified.

was not specified

Emphasizes the lack of detail regarding the identity.

was not revealed

Focuses on the fact that the identity was not made public.

was obscured

Suggests that the identity was hidden or made unclear.

was not recognized

Indicates a failure to acknowledge or recognize the identity.

identity was unknown

States directly that the identity was not known.

FAQs

How can I use "was not identified" in a sentence?

Use "was not identified" to indicate that a person, object, or detail could not be determined or specified. For example, "The suspect "remained unidentified" despite the investigation".

What are some alternatives to "was not identified"?

Alternatives include "remained unidentified", "was not named", or "was not disclosed". The best choice depends on the specific context.

Is it better to use the active or passive voice when describing something that wasn't identified?

While the passive voice ("was not identified") is grammatically correct, the active voice can sometimes be more direct. For example, instead of "The error was not identified", you could say "No one identified the error."

What does it mean when a source "was not identified" in a news report?

When a source "was not identified" in a news report, it means the reporter is protecting the source's anonymity, often to encourage them to share sensitive information that they would otherwise be unwilling to disclose. This protects the source from potential repercussions.