was obscure

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "was obscure" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to describe something that was not clear or easily understood in the past. Example: "The meaning of the ancient text was obscure, leaving scholars puzzled for centuries."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Encyclopedias

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

57 human-written examples

Hughes was obscure and ambitious.

The New Yorker

One target was obscure wine vocabulary.

The New York Times - Food

Every aspect of it was obscure.

The New Yorker

Her childhood was obscure, healthy, bucolic.

The New Yorker

"It was surprising, because I thought it was obscure.

The New York Times - Magazine

There was never a day when John O'Connor was obscure".

The New York Times

To some critics Mr. Tabucchi's work was obscure, insufficiently narrative and overfilled with looming portents.

The New York Times - Books

The manner of Litvinenko's poisoning was obscure almost until the moment he died.

The New Yorker

He had also embraced his vocation, though its path was obscure.

The New Yorker

Hawthorne had much to offer: Pierce was obscure; Hawthorne was a celebrity.

The New Yorker

Now there are data to support the intuition; to reveal what was obscure.

The Economist

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "was obscure", ensure the context clearly indicates what specifically lacked clarity. For instance, specify whether it was a concept, a detail, or an origin that "was obscure".

Common error

Avoid using "was obscure" in overly complex sentences where the lack of clarity arises from sentence structure rather than the subject itself. Simplify the sentence to improve overall understanding.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "was obscure" functions as a descriptive element within a sentence, typically modifying a noun or noun phrase. It indicates that the subject lacked clarity, was not well-known, or was difficult to understand at a certain point in the past. As Ludwig AI confirms, it is grammatically correct.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

39%

Science

37%

Encyclopedias

8%

Less common in

Wiki

6%

Formal & Business

4%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "was obscure" is a grammatically sound and frequently used expression to indicate a lack of clarity or understanding in the past. According to Ludwig AI, the phrase is correct and usable in written English. It finds application across varied contexts, including news, science, and encyclopedias. While alternatives like "was unclear" or "was vague" exist, "was obscure" often imparts a sense of mystery or challenge. When employing this phrase, ensure that the subject lacking clarity is evident and that the sentence structure remains straightforward for optimal understanding.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

was not clear

Directly states the absence of clarity.

was vague

Emphasizes the lack of precision or detail.

was ambiguous

Highlights the uncertainty and open to multiple interpretations.

was indistinct

Stresses the lack of sharpness or definition.

lacked clarity

Focuses on the absence of clearness or distinctness.

was not well-defined

Highlights the lack of clear boundaries or parameters.

remained unexplained

Focuses on the lack of an explanation or understanding.

was shrouded in mystery

Emphasizes the mysterious and hidden nature.

was hidden from view

Highlights the fact that something was not visible or apparent.

was beyond comprehension

Emphasizes the difficulty to understand.

FAQs

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

You can use "was obscure" to describe something that was not clear, well-known, or easily understood. For example, "The origin of the tradition was obscure." or "The meaning of the poem "was obscure" to many readers".

What are some alternatives to "was obscure"?

Alternatives include "was unclear", "was vague", "was ambiguous", "was indistinct", or "remained unexplained". The best choice depends on the specific nuance you want to convey.

Is it better to say "was obscure" or "is obscure"?

The choice between "was obscure" and "is obscure" depends on the time frame you're referencing. Use "was obscure" for something that lacked clarity in the past, and "is obscure" for something that currently lacks clarity.

What's the difference between "was obscure" and "was unknown"?

"Was obscure" implies a lack of clarity or understanding, while "was unknown" simply means that something was not known or recognized. A fact "was unknown" because nobody has knowledge of it, while something "was obscure" even though it existed but wasn't readily understood.