which was of

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "which was of" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to indicate possession or association, often in a descriptive context. Example: "The painting, which was of great historical significance, was displayed in the museum."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Encyclopedias

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

56 human-written examples

Which was, of course, important.

Independent

Which was, of course, the point.

The New York Times - Sports

Which was of course ignored.

The New York Times

Which was, of course, his real point.

The Guardian

My apologies for my mincing, which was, of course, inadvertent.

The Guardian - Books

Which was, of course, exactly what they were.

The New York Times

Tells about the voyage, which was of 42 days duration.

The New Yorker

Please return the ring, which was of course a loan.

The New Yorker

Not the usual explosion, which was of papers toppling stacks, tipping files.

The New Yorker

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

2 human-written examples

Which is, of course, what it was.

The New Yorker

Which is, of course, an excellent question.

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

Use "which was of" to add descriptive, non-essential information to a sentence. Ensure the clause is set off with commas.

Common error

Avoid using "that" in place of "which" when introducing non-restrictive clauses. "Which" is appropriate when the clause provides extra information but isn't essential to the sentence's meaning.

Linguistic Context

"Which was of" functions as a relative clause introducing descriptive or non-essential information. According to Ludwig, this phrase typically adds detail about a noun without being crucial to the sentence's core meaning, similar to the examples provided.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

57%

Science

24%

Encyclopedias

5%

Less common in

Wiki

3%

Formal & Business

3%

Social Media

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "which was of" serves as a relative clause, adding descriptive detail to sentences. Ludwig AI confirms its grammatical correctness and common usage across various contexts, particularly in news, science, and encyclopedic content. While "which was of" is versatile, remember to use it for non-essential information, setting it off with commas. Alternatives like "that consisted of" or "that comprised" can offer similar meanings, though with subtle differences. Understanding these nuances will enhance your writing and ensure clarity. According to Ludwig examples, "which was of" usage covers various sources such as The New York Times, The New Yorker, and Encyclopedia Britannica, confirming its wide-spread usage.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

that consisted of

Emphasizes the components or elements that made up the subject.

that comprised

Similar to "that consisted of", but often used for a more formal or comprehensive listing.

that pertained to

Highlights a relevant connection or association.

that concerned

Indicates a direct relevance or involvement.

that belonged to

Indicates ownership or association with a particular entity.

that was related to

Emphasizes a broader connection or relationship.

that held

Highlights a characteristic or quality that the subject possessed.

that featured

Emphasizes a prominent aspect or characteristic.

that presented

Highlights how something appeared or was shown.

that embodied

Suggests the subject was a representation or example of something.

FAQs

How can I use "which was of" in a sentence?

Use "which was of" to add a descriptive, non-essential clause to a sentence, set off by commas. For example: "The book, which was of great historical value, was carefully preserved."

What are some alternatives to "which was of"?

You can use alternatives like "that consisted of", "that comprised", or "that pertained to" depending on the specific meaning you want to convey. See more options "that comprised".

Is it correct to use "that was of" instead of "which was of"?

While "that" can introduce restrictive clauses, "which" is preferred for non-restrictive clauses that add extra information. Consider rephrasing to use "that consisted of" or "that comprised" if you want to use "that".

What's the difference between "which was of" and "that was of"?

"Which was of" introduces a non-restrictive clause, adding extra detail that isn't essential to the sentence. A sentence like "The car, which was of German make, handled well" implies you're adding extra information. Using "that was of" would imply that the description of being german is important in the meaning of the whole sentence.