were not characterised

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "were not characterised" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing the attributes or features of something in the past that were not present or defined. Example: "The results of the study indicated that the subjects were not characterised by any significant behavioral changes."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

14 human-written examples

To investigate maternal thrombophilia in cases of Stillbirth (SB), also an uncertain topic because most case series were not characterised for cause/associated conditions of death.

Early Human Development

In contrast to prior hypothesis patients with CPTH were not characterised by a specific personality profile although long lasting CPTH was associated to higher neuroticism and a lower degree of extraversion and openness.

The Journal of Headache and Pain

However, dropouts were not characterised by a worse training outcome at the end of the training.

European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

Genes SMU_984 and SMU_609 encode two autolysins which were not characterised so far.

BMC Genomics

The expression patterns were also recorded when obvious, but were not characterised as exhaustively.

Development (Cambridge)

These four false-negative examinations were not characterised by especially low vascular enhancement or overlying motion artefacts.

European Radiology

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

46 human-written examples

The money was not characterised as commission, but as quasi-official fees for marketing services.

The Guardian

The pages that are not characterised by bitterness and bile do not make gripping reading.

The Guardian - Books

THE work of Section K was not characterised by the announcement of any discovery of very exceptional interest, nor by any sensational feature.

Nature

Academic economics, in any flavour or school of thought, is not characterised by steady scientific progress just because economists wish it were so.

The Guardian - Business

Tellingly, a wedding is not characterised as an opportunity to be a queen, and to enjoy the perhaps more distinguished, and potent, form of regality that implies.

The Guardian - Lifestyle

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "were not characterised", ensure that the context clearly indicates what characteristics are being referred to and why their absence is significant. For example, "The samples were not characterised by high levels of contamination, indicating a clean manufacturing process."

Common error

Avoid overusing passive constructions like "were not characterised" as it can make your writing sound vague and less direct. Instead, consider rephrasing the sentence to emphasize the subject and its actions. For example, instead of "The patients were not characterised by the researchers", try "The researchers did not characterise the patients".

Linguistic Context

The phrase "were not characterised" functions as a passive construction indicating the absence of specific attributes or features. According to Ludwig AI, this phrase is grammatically correct and usable in written English. This suggests that subjects in question lack defined qualities, as seen in various examples from Ludwig.

Expression frequency: Common

Frequent in

Science

75%

News & Media

20%

Formal & Business

5%

Less common in

Academia

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "were not characterised" is a grammatically sound passive construction commonly used to indicate a lack of defined attributes. As Ludwig AI indicates, the phrase is valid and frequently appears in scientific and news contexts. While correct, it is advisable to avoid overuse of passive voice constructions for clearer and more direct writing. Related phrases such as "were not defined" and "were not identified" can provide nuanced alternatives. Remember that using "were not characterised" conveys that a lack of detail is important and needs to be considered.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

were not defined

Focuses on the lack of a clear definition.

were not identified

Emphasizes the absence of recognition or detection.

were not described

Highlights the lack of a detailed account or explanation.

were not specified

Indicates the absence of explicit details or conditions.

were not distinguished

Implies the lack of differentiation or separation.

were not known

Highlights the absence of knowledge or awareness.

were not established

Focuses on the absence of a firm basis or foundation.

were not determined

Emphasizes the absence of a conclusive decision or finding.

were not assessed

Highlights the lack of evaluation or measurement.

were not explored

Indicates the absence of thorough investigation or examination.

FAQs

How can I use "were not characterised" in a sentence?

You can use "were not characterised" to describe a lack of specific attributes. For instance, "The early prototypes "were not characterised" by the features of the final product."

What are some alternatives to "were not characterised"?

Alternatives include "were not defined", "were not identified", or "were not described", depending on the specific nuance you want to convey.

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

While "were not characterised" is grammatically correct, using the active voice (e.g., "the researchers did not characterise") can often make your writing more direct and engaging. The choice depends on the desired emphasis and context.

In what contexts is "were not characterised" most commonly used?

"Were not characterised" is frequently used in scientific and technical writing to describe samples, results, or phenomena that lack specific, defined attributes. Other contexts include news reports and formal documents.