"could be reduced by practicing." vs "could be reduced by practice."

Question

"could be reduced by practicing." vs "could be reduced by practice."

Both phrases are correct, but they are used in slightly different contexts. 'Could be reduced by practicing' is correct when referring to the action of practicing as a continuous process, while 'could be reduced by practice' is correct when referring to the general concept of practice as a solution. Both are commonly used and convey a similar meaning.

Last Updated: March 28, 2024

This phrase is used when emphasizing the ongoing nature of the action of practicing in reducing something. It implies that continuous practice is necessary for reduction.

Alternatives:

could be reduced through practicing.
could be decreased by practicing.
could be minimized by practicing.
could be alleviated by practicing.
could be mitigated by practicing.

This phrase is used when referring to practice as a general concept or approach that can lead to reduction. It implies that engaging in practice in general can help in reducing something.

Alternatives:

could be reduced through practice.
could be decreased by practice.
could be minimized by practice.
could be alleviated by practice.
could be mitigated by practice.

Answer 1

could be reduced by practicing.

This phrase is correct and commonly used when referring to the action of practicing as a continuous process.

Answer 2

could be reduced by practice.

This phrase is correct and commonly used when referring to the general concept of practice as a solution.

"could be reduced by practicing." vs "could be reduced by practice."

could be reduced by practicing.

could be reduced by practice.

Related Comparisons