Used and loved by millions
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com
were supplemented
Grammar usage guide and real-world examplesUSAGE SUMMARY
The phrase "were supplemented" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when indicating that something has been added to or enhanced by additional information or resources in the past. Example: "The report was comprehensive, but it were supplemented with recent data to provide a clearer picture."
✓ Grammatically correct
Science
News & Media
Academia
Alternative expressions(6)
Table of contents
Usage summary
Human-verified examples
Expert writing tips
Linguistic context
Ludwig's wrap-up
Alternative expressions
FAQs
Human-verified examples from authoritative sources
Exact Expressions
60 human-written examples
The interviews were supplemented by documentary materials.
News & Media
The tracer studies were supplemented with modelling.
The data were supplemented with questionnaires.
At home, offerings were supplemented by prayers for marital felicity.
Encyclopedias
The results were supplemented with microscopic investigations.
Science
Observations were supplemented by fractographic analysis of fractured specimens.
Opera house performances were supplemented by spectacular productions in circus arenas and sports centres.
News & Media
The measurements were supplemented by metallurgical and microscopic investigations.
All diets were supplemented with 3 kg/head/day concentrates.
Science
All animals were supplemented with 2 kg of concentrate.
In addition, some diets were supplemented with purified amino acids.
Science
Expert writing Tips
Best practice
Consider alternatives such as "were enhanced" or "were augmented" to more precisely convey the intended nuance of improvement or increase.
Common error
Avoid over-supplementing to the point where the original information is overshadowed or the supplement becomes extraneous. Focus on quality over quantity when adding to existing content.
Source & Trust
86%
Authority and reliability
4.6/5
Expert rating
Real-world application tested
Linguistic Context
The phrase "were supplemented" functions as a passive verb phrase, indicating that a subject received additions or enhancements. This construction is commonly used to describe how information, data, or resources have been enhanced with extra components. As Ludwig AI confirms, it is widely accepted and utilized.
Frequent in
Science
68%
News & Media
14%
Academia
11%
Less common in
Encyclopedias
4%
Wiki
2%
Formal & Business
1%
Ludwig's WRAP-UP
In summary, "were supplemented" is a grammatically correct and frequently used passive verb phrase. It serves to indicate that a subject has been enhanced with additional information or resources. According to Ludwig, its correctness is well-established. The phrase is most commonly found in scientific and academic contexts, maintaining a formal and neutral tone. When employing "were supplemented", ensure that the added elements genuinely enhance the original subject and avoid redundancy. Alternatives like "were enhanced" or "were augmented" can provide nuanced alternatives depending on the specific context. The phrase's consistent usage across authoritative sources underscores its reliability and correctness.
More alternative expressions(6)
Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:
were augmented
Implies an increase in quantity or size, emphasizing the act of making something larger or more substantial.
were enhanced
Suggests an improvement in quality or value, highlighting the act of making something better.
were reinforced
Emphasizes the strengthening or bolstering of something, focusing on support and stability.
were complemented
Indicates that something was enhanced by something else that completes or enhances it.
were fortified
Implies that something was strengthened or protected, emphasizing defense and resilience.
were enriched
Suggests that something was improved by adding valuable or desirable elements.
were supported
Highlights the provision of assistance or evidence, focusing on validation and backing.
were expanded
Indicates an increase in scope or range, emphasizing the act of making something more comprehensive.
were increased
Suggests a rise in number or amount, focusing on quantitative growth.
were appended
Implies something was added at the end.
FAQs
How can I use "were supplemented" in a sentence?
You can use "were supplemented" to indicate that something was enhanced or completed with additional information or resources. For example, "The initial findings "were supplemented" with data from a follow-up study".
What's a good alternative to "were supplemented"?
Depending on the context, you could use alternatives like "were enhanced", "were augmented", or "were reinforced" to convey similar meanings with slightly different nuances.
Is it correct to say "was supplemented" instead of "were supplemented"?
No, "was supplemented" is used with singular subjects, while "were supplemented" is used with plural subjects. For example, "The report was supplemented" (singular) versus "The reports "were supplemented"" (plural).
What is the difference between "were supplemented" and "were complemented"?
"Were supplemented" means that something was added to or enhanced, while "were complemented" means that something was enhanced by something else that completes it. Supplementing adds something extra; complementing adds something that makes the original thing whole or better. If you are not sure of which one to use, consider the alternative phrases "were enhanced" or "were reinforced".
Editing plus AI, all in one place.
Stop switching between tools. Your AI writing partner for everything—polishing proposals, crafting emails, finding the right tone.
Table of contents
Usage summary
Human-verified examples
Expert writing tips
Linguistic context
Ludwig's wrap-up
Alternative expressions
FAQs
Source & Trust
86%
Authority and reliability
4.6/5
Expert rating
Real-world application tested