was substantial enough

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "was substantial enough" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to indicate that something met a significant level or standard in a particular context. Example: "The evidence presented in court was substantial enough to convince the jury of the defendant's guilt."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Academia

Science

Encyclopedias

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

29 human-written examples

It was substantial enough to hold and distribute heat evenly without being unbearably heavy.

The Washington Post

Viewer reaction to the clip was substantial enough that they put out another and another.

The New York Times

Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif). said the evidence was "substantial enough to warrant the consideration of expulsion" had Ensign not resigned in early May.

The Washington Post

But Joseph Burton, Jones's lead lawyer, said afterward that he did not believe the evidence was substantial enough to warrant any action against Jones, a gold-medal sprinter.

The New York Times - Sports

I guess it was substantial enough that he felt that despite his attachment to Baltimore and Baltimore fans, he would move on.

The New York Times - Sports

Proving that he was substantial enough to be president was, of course, what all the commentators said he had to do.

The New York Times

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

31 human-written examples

Peaches are substantial enough to handle flame.

The Washington Post

None are substantial enough for turkey.

The New York Times - Food

Some analysts do not think the closings are substantial enough.

The New York Times

But they are substantial enough to generate profit.

The New York Times

In fact, many starters, at from $11 to $16, are substantial enough to be entrees.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "was substantial enough", ensure that the context clearly indicates what standard or requirement is being met. This adds clarity and precision to your writing.

Common error

Avoid redundancy by not always pairing "substantial" with "enough". Sometimes, "was substantial" is sufficient. Overuse can make your writing sound repetitive and less impactful.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "was substantial enough" functions as a predicate adjective, modifying the subject of a sentence to indicate that something reached a significant level or met a specific requirement. Ludwig confirms this through numerous examples.

Expression frequency: Common

Frequent in

News & Media

50%

Academia

22%

Science

17%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

8%

Wiki

3%

Formal & Business

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "was substantial enough" is a grammatically sound and commonly used expression indicating that something reached a noteworthy level or met a specific requirement. According to Ludwig, its function is primarily as a predicate adjective, serving to modify a subject by emphasizing the adequacy of a certain attribute. Predominantly found in "News & Media", "Academia", and "Science" contexts, it maintains a neutral register. While alternatives like "was adequate enough" and "was sufficient enough" exist, "was substantial enough" distinctly implies that the level was notably high. To avoid redundancy, the word "enough" isn't always needed. When using the phrase, ensure the context makes it clear what standard or requirement is being met.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

was adequate enough

Replaces "substantial" with "adequate", implying a minimum acceptable level was reached.

was sufficient enough

Replaces "substantial" with "sufficient", suggesting that the amount or degree was enough to meet a need.

was considerable enough

Replaces "substantial" with "considerable", emphasizing the size or importance of something.

was large enough

Focuses on the size or quantity, suggesting it met a required minimum.

was significant enough

Emphasizes the importance or consequence of something being at a certain level.

was potent enough

Highlights the strength or effectiveness of something being at the required level.

was appreciable enough

Suggests something was noticeable or measurable to a satisfactory degree.

was marked enough

Implies the level was distinct and easily observed.

was material enough

Focuses on whether something reached a level of importance or relevance.

was weighty enough

Conveys the level of importance or influence was significant.

FAQs

How can I use "was substantial enough" in a sentence?

You can use "was substantial enough" to indicate that something met a certain level or requirement. For example, "The evidence presented was substantial enough to convince the jury."

What are some alternatives to "was substantial enough"?

Some alternatives include "was adequate enough", "was sufficient enough", or "was significant enough", depending on the specific context.

Is it better to say "was substantial" or "was substantial enough"?

Both phrases are grammatically correct, but "was substantial enough" implies that something reached a required or expected level, whereas "was substantial" simply emphasizes the size, amount, or importance.

What is the difference between "was substantial enough" and "was adequate enough"?

"Was substantial enough" suggests a greater degree or impact than "was adequate enough". "Substantial" implies more than the minimum, while "adequate" suggests just meeting the minimum requirement.