was recognised

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "was recognised" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in contexts where you want to indicate that someone or something was acknowledged or identified in the past. Example: "She was recognised for her outstanding contributions to the community during the awards ceremony."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Academia

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

I was recognised yesterday.

Independent

"In the process my ability was recognised.

The Guardian - Sport

His contribution was recognised by a state funeral in Nigeria.

The Guardian - Books

Solzhenitsyn's lecture was recognised as an assertion of human dignity.

The Guardian - Arts

Guardian Jobs was recognised for its partnership with Cafcass.

The Guardian

This was recognised widely in West Midlands at the time.

The Guardian - Business

The highly autonomous RS was recognised by the peace settlement.

The Guardian

Kilvert's lyrical nature writing was recognised for its Wordsworthian sensibility.

The Guardian - Books

Eventually Owens was recognised as the inspirational figure he is.

The Guardian - Sport

Railway, in orthodox manner, ensured that their contribution was recognised.

The Guardian - Sport

The problem was recognised by Nasheed when in office.

The Guardian

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "was recognised", ensure the context clearly indicates who or what did the recognizing. This provides clarity and avoids ambiguity.

Common error

Avoid relying too heavily on passive constructions like "was recognised". While grammatically correct, overuse can make your writing sound weak or indirect. Consider rephrasing to active voice where appropriate for a more direct and engaging style.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "was recognised" functions as a passive construction, indicating that a subject received acknowledgment or identification. Ludwig confirms its correctness and usability. It shifts the focus from the actor to the recipient of the action.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

39%

Science

32%

Wiki

9%

Less common in

Academia

5%

Formal & Business

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "was recognised" functions as a grammatically sound passive construction, widely employed to signify acknowledgment or identification. Ludwig AI confirms that this phrase is correct and usable. While versatile across varied contexts, it's particularly prevalent in news, scientific, and academic writing. For alternatives, consider "was acknowledged" or "was identified", depending on the nuance you wish to convey. When employing the phrase, ensure clarity regarding who or what did the recognizing to maintain precision in your communication.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

was acknowledged

Emphasizes formal acceptance or admission of something.

was identified

Highlights the act of pinpointing or discovering something specific.

was credited

Focuses on giving someone recognition for their contribution or achievement.

was celebrated

Implies a public and joyous acknowledgment of someone's achievements.

was honored

Suggests a formal and respectful recognition, often with an award or ceremony.

was validated

Indicates that something was confirmed or proven to be true or legitimate.

was appreciated

Highlights that something was valued or admired.

was esteemed

Implies a high level of respect and admiration.

was lauded

Suggests public praise and commendation.

was ratified

Implies an official approval or confirmation, often in a legal or political context.

FAQs

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

The phrase "was recognised" indicates that someone or something received acknowledgment. For example, "Her talent "was recognised" with an award" or "The problem "was recognised" early on".

What's a more formal alternative to "was recognised"?

A more formal alternative is "was acknowledged". This emphasizes a formal acceptance or admission.

Is it better to use active or passive voice with "recognised"?

It depends on the context. Passive voice ("was recognised") is suitable when the focus is on the recipient of the action. Active voice (e.g., "they recognised") is better when you want to emphasize the actor.

What is the difference between "was recognised" and "was identified"?

"Was recognised" implies acknowledgment or validation, while "was identified" suggests pinpointing or discovering something specific. The choice depends on whether you want to emphasize acknowledgement or the act of finding something out.