Which one is correct?
"It could not be a coincidence" or "that could be a coincidence"?

TextRanch: The best way to perfect your writing.

Discover why 1,062,726 users count on TextRanch to get their English corrected!

One of our experts will correct your English.

Our experts

100% Human-Powered Editing!

It could not be a coincidence

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English to suggest that something is unlikely to be a coincidence.

This phrase is used to express the idea that a situation or event is not likely to be a coincidence.

Examples:

  • The timing of his arrival and the power outage? It could not be a coincidence.

Alternatives:

  • It's unlikely to be a coincidence
  • It's improbable that it's a coincidence
  • It's doubtful it's a coincidence
  • It's improbable that it's chance
  • It's unlikely that it's just a fluke

that could be a coincidence

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English to suggest that something might be a coincidence.

This phrase is used to express the possibility that a situation or event is a coincidence.

Examples:

  • I saw her at the store yesterday, but that could be a coincidence.

Alternatives:

  • It might be a coincidence
  • It could be a fluke
  • It may just be chance
  • It's possible it's a coincidence
  • It's conceivable that it's a coincidence
Both phrases are correct, but they convey opposite meanings. 'That could be a coincidence' suggests that something might be a coincidence, while 'It could not be a coincidence' implies that something is unlikely to be a coincidence. The choice between the two depends on the intended meaning.

Last Updated: March 24, 2024

Related Comparisons

Why choose TextRanch?

Lowest prices
Up to 50% lower than other online editing sites.

Fastest Times
Our team of editors is working for you 24/7.

Qualified Editors
Native English experts for UK or US English.

Top Customer Service
We are here to help. Satisfaction guaranteed!