"have a bad history with" vs "have a bad history of"

Question

"have a bad history with" vs "have a bad history of"

Both phrases are correct, but they are used in slightly different contexts. 'Have a bad history of' is used when referring to a pattern of negative events or behaviors associated with someone or something. On the other hand, 'have a bad history with' is used when describing a negative relationship or association between two entities.

Last Updated: March 20, 2024

This phrase is used to indicate a negative connection or interaction between two entities, such as people, organizations, or things.

Examples:

She has a bad history with her former boss.
The country has a bad history with foreign invaders.
The team has a bad history with that particular referee.

Alternatives:

have a negative history with
have a troubled history with
have a difficult history with
have a strained history with

This phrase is used to indicate a consistent record of negative occurrences or behaviors related to a particular person, group, or thing.

Examples:

They have a bad history of missing deadlines.
The company has a bad history of unethical practices.
He has a bad history of getting into trouble.

Alternatives:

have a history of
have a record of
have a reputation for
have a pattern of

Answer 1

have a bad history with

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English when describing a negative relationship or association between two entities.

Answer 2

have a bad history of

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English when referring to a pattern of negative events or behaviors associated with someone or something.

"have a bad history with" vs "have a bad history of"

have a bad history with

have a bad history of

Related Comparisons