we are short of

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase 'we are short of' is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it when you want to express the idea that you are lacking something. For example, "We are short of volunteers this year, so we need to encourage more people to participate."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Formal & Business

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

52 human-written examples

"We are short of labor," he said.

The New York Times

It's not as if we are short of solutions.

The Guardian - Opinion

Yet I read we are short of houses and need to build more".

The Guardian

"We are trying to do more, but we are short of staff and resources".

The Guardian

We are not living in a time where we are short of black talent.

The Guardian - Opinion

The UN has asked for $8bn and we are short of that".

The Guardian

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

8 human-written examples

"We're short of keys".

The New York Times

We were short of money.

The Guardian - Film

So we're short of product".

The New York Times

We're short of equipment, everything".

The New York Times

We were short of two or three works of rehearsal.

The Guardian

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "we are short of", be specific about what is lacking and the consequences. For example, "We are short of funding, which will delay the project."

Common error

Avoid using "we are short of" when you mean "almost" or "nearly". "Short of" indicating deficiency should not be interchanged with its use as a preposition indicating proximity to an action, such as "Short of giving up, we tried everything."

Linguistic Context

The phrase "we are short of" functions as a declarative statement expressing a deficiency or lack. Ludwig confirms its correct and frequent usage in expressing a current state of need or scarcity. It directly communicates that the subject is lacking something necessary.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

40%

Science

30%

Formal & Business

15%

Less common in

Reference

5%

Encyclopedias

5%

Wiki

5%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "we are short of" is a common and grammatically correct way to express a lack or deficiency. Ludwig AI validates its usability across various contexts, particularly in news, scientific, and business domains. The phrase functions as a declarative statement to inform about a deficit, with a neutral register suitable for a wide audience. When writing, be specific about what is lacking. Alternatives include "we lack" or "we don't have enough", offering similar meanings with slight variations in formality. The expert rating is high, reflecting its consistent and authoritative usage in English writing.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

we lack

Uses a more concise verb to express the absence of something.

we are lacking

Emphasizes the current state of deficiency.

we have a shortage of

Focuses on the existence of a shortage from a different perspective.

we don't have enough

Expresses the insufficiency more directly.

we are deficient in

Uses a more formal and technical term for lacking.

we have insufficient

A formal way of saying that the quantity of something is not enough.

our supply is low

Highlights the reduced quantity of something available.

we are experiencing a scarcity of

Indicates a more significant and widespread lack.

resources are limited

Focuses on the limited availability of resources.

we are strapped for

Implies a financial or resource constraint.

FAQs

What does "we are short of" mean?

The phrase "we are short of" means that there is an insufficient amount or supply of something. It indicates a lack or deficiency.

How can I use "we are short of" in a sentence?

You can use "we are short of" to express a lack of resources, time, or other necessities. For example, "We are short of staff this week" or "We are short of ideas for the project".

What can I say instead of "we are short of"?

You can use alternatives like "we lack", "we are lacking", or "we don't have enough" to convey a similar meaning.

Is "we are short of" formal or informal?

"We are short of" is generally considered neutral in tone and can be used in both formal and informal contexts. However, in very formal writing, you might consider more precise alternatives like "we are deficient in" or "we have insufficient".