was practically identical

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "was practically identical" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to describe two or more things that are very similar or nearly the same in appearance, function, or characteristics. Example: "The two reports were practically identical, making it difficult to determine which one was the original."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

News & Media

Encyclopedias

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

34 human-written examples

This is a surprising turn of events since the House version of the bill was practically identical to the Senate version up until the evening before it passed.

The New York Times

After the McCain-Edwards-Kennedy legislation passed, we decided to reintroduce our bill so that it was practically identical to the Senate-passed version.

The New York Times

Comparative Na content in the other variants was practically identical.

Advances in Space Research

The expression of hMLH1 and hMSH2 was practically identical between healthy individuals and cancer patients.

Cancer Letters

In these experimental conditions, the ratio of the phase component and the tonic one was practically identical to the control.

Nanoscale Research Letters

And a Shanghai coffee shop whose name was practically identical to Starbucks' brand in China has unveiled a new name: "Fangyun".

Forbes

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

26 human-written examples

Template and target sequences for the MHC and ELC are practically identical (>91% sequence identity) suggesting Modeller produces a reliable structure [ 96].

BMC Genomics

They are practically identical with British regulations".

The Guardian

The logic of the banks is practically identical.

The New Yorker

All of these are practically identical with the received text.

Encyclopedia Britannica

In many respects, the TiVo (www.tivo.com) and ReplayTV (www.replaytv.com) are practically identical.

The New York Times - Tech

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "was practically identical", ensure that the context provides enough information for the reader to understand the basis of the comparison. Be specific about what aspects were nearly the same.

Common error

Avoid using "was practically identical" when there are significant differences between the items being compared. Overstating the similarity can mislead the reader and weaken your argument.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "was practically identical" functions as a descriptive adjective phrase. It qualifies a subject by indicating a high degree of similarity, implying only minor or negligible differences. As Ludwig AI confirms, this usage is grammatically correct.

Expression frequency: Common

Frequent in

Science

58%

News & Media

33%

Encyclopedias

9%

Less common in

Formal & Business

0%

Wiki

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "was practically identical" serves to emphasize the striking similarity between two subjects while acknowledging the potential existence of minor, inconsequential differences. Ludwig AI indicates that this phrase is grammatically correct and widely accepted. It frequently appears in scientific, news, and encyclopedia contexts, highlighting its versatility across various registers. To ensure clarity, always contextualize your usage by clarifying the aspects under comparison. When near equivalence is overstated, it will mislead your audience. Consider using alternatives like "was almost the same" or "was virtually indistinguishable" to add nuance and precision to your writing.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

was almost the same

Replaces "practically identical" with a more general term indicating similarity, reducing the emphasis on exactness.

was virtually indistinguishable

Emphasizes the difficulty in discerning any difference, adding a sense of subtlety.

was nearly equivalent

Highlights the functional equivalence, rather than visual or structural similarity.

was substantially similar

Indicates a high degree of resemblance, but allows for minor discrepancies.

was closely analogous

Suggests a parallel or correspondence in some respects, perhaps not in every detail.

was effectively equivalent

Focuses on the outcome or result being the same, despite potential differences in process or form.

was essentially the same

Highlights the core elements being identical, while acknowledging superficial differences.

was much alike

Offers a simpler and more informal way to express similarity.

bore a strong resemblance

Emphasizes the visual or superficial similarities between the subjects.

was strikingly similar

Highlights the surprising nature or degree of similarity.

FAQs

What does "was practically identical" mean?

The phrase "was practically identical" means that two or more things were very similar or nearly the same, with only minor or negligible differences.

How can I use "was practically identical" in a sentence?

You can use "was practically identical" to compare two things and emphasize their similarity. For example, "The two reports "were practically identical", differing only in formatting."

What can I say instead of "was practically identical"?

You can use alternatives like "was almost the same", "was virtually indistinguishable", or "was nearly equivalent" to convey a similar meaning.

Is it appropriate to use "was practically identical" in formal writing?

Yes, "was practically identical" is appropriate for formal writing. It clearly conveys a high degree of similarity while acknowledging minor differences. The examples in Ludwig show it in formal and scientific papers.