what we would call

USAGE SUMMARY

"what we would call" is a perfectly valid phrase that is commonly used in written English.
You can use this phrase to introduce the name or phrase that is typically used to describe a situation, concept, or object. For example, "What we would call a volcano is actually a mountain that erupts lava."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Academia

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

What we would call Neets then?

The Guardian

Cuban food is what we would call "organically grown".

The Guardian

This is what we would call core recognition.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

It's what we would call bright or up-tempo.

The New York Times

"This is what we would call a clone-and-kill bill!" he exclaimed.

The New Yorker

It is about what we would call normal emotions, notably love and desperation.

The New Yorker

A "dummy" is the British term for what we would call a pacifier or soother.

The Economist

In my opinion, she's a modern gal, what we would call a tomboy.

The New Yorker

This car looks like a racecar or what we would call a sports car.

The New York Times

One — there's some formal, what we would call descriptive novelties: light, time, the question of time.

Yale University

At the age of 40, he had what we would call a peak experience.

Cornell University

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "what we would call" to introduce a term that may be unfamiliar to your audience, providing context and clarity.

Common error

While generally acceptable, avoid overusing "what we would call" in formal or academic writing. Opt for more concise alternatives like "termed" or "known as" for a more professional tone.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "what we would call" functions as an introductory device, signaling that the speaker or writer is about to define or clarify a term. Ludwig examples show its prevalent use across various contexts to introduce a definition, interpretation or a specific name for something. The Ludwig AI confirms that the phrase is grammatically correct.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

39%

Academia

29%

Science

21%

Less common in

Formal & Business

11%

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "what we would call" serves as a versatile introductory phrase used to clarify or define a term for the audience. As Ludwig AI confirms, it is grammatically sound and frequently employed across various domains, including news, academic and scientific contexts. While generally neutral in register, it's advisable to use more formal alternatives in highly professional settings to avoid any perceived informality. The phrase is very common, demonstrating its usefulness in aiding comprehension and building a shared understanding between writer and reader.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

the way we generally describe it

Focuses on the descriptive aspect and common understanding.

what is typically referred to as

Highlights the typicality of the reference, useful when emphasizing standard nomenclature.

what is usually designated

Replaces "call" with "designated", suggesting a formal designation.

as we might term it

Replaces "call" with "term", suggesting a slightly more formal or precise designation.

the accepted terminology

Indicates an specific context for the terminology.

as it is generally understood

Indicates an generally acceptance or interpretation of something.

as it's commonly known

Focuses on the common recognition of the term, rather than the act of naming it.

in our current understanding

Highlights that term is valid in the current moment.

in contemporary parlance

Emphasizes that the term is current or modern.

to put it in simpler terms

Highlights that the query is in simple terms.

FAQs

How can I use "what we would call" in a sentence?

Use "what we would call" to introduce a term or phrase, often followed by a definition or explanation. For instance, "That feeling of unease is what we would call "cognitive dissonance"".

What are some alternatives to "what we would call"?

Alternatives include "as it's commonly known", "typically referred to as", or "in contemporary parlance", depending on the context.

Is it correct to say "what we would call" in formal writing?

While grammatically correct, using more concise alternatives such as "termed" or "known as" is preferable for a more formal tone. Sometimes brevity enhances clarity in professional contexts.

How does "what we would call" differ from "as it is known as"?

"What we would call" introduces a term the speaker is defining, while "as it is known as" refers to a term already established and widely recognized. It depends on if you, as a writer, are introducing the term or citing an established one.