Browse our dictionary apps today and ensure you are never again lost for words.
As a new learner of English,I didn't understand it well. Instead to use "You are never again' in the above sentence, could I use 'you will never again lost for words'?
English Language Learners Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for speakers of other languages learning English. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
"lost for words"
If someone is lost for words, they cannot think of anything to say
I'm lost for words–it's fantastic.
She was gaping at it, lost for words.
It is not-idiomatic to change the set phrase to "lost of words", but it doesn't really change the meaning.
Note: the above has been made erroneous after the OP edited the fix into the post.
In the phrase you have changed, you change the verb are to the modal verb will. Therefore that phrase becomes ungrammatical because there is no verb that links "you" with the state of being "lost for word".
Therefore, it would be appropriate to add the verb be to the phrase:
... and ensure you will never again be lost for words.
To specifically break down "[to] ensure [that] you are never again lost for words":
The bracketed words are likely to be added in more formal writing.
"lost for words" is used as a description of a "state-of-being" similar to hungry, dead, retired, unemployed, tired. Taking away the adverbs "never" and "again", the phrase becomes:
"[to] ensure [that] you are lost for words"
Obviously the meaning is the opposite of the original meaning, but connects the subject, "you", to a state-of-being "lost for words". If it helps, the first person or third person versions would be:
1st person: "[to] ensure [that] I am lost for words"
3rd person: "[to] ensure [that] she is lost for words"
Adding "never again" implies that at some time in the past, the subject was "lost for words". The mentioned dictionary apps will ensure that the subject will not be lost for words in the future. Therefore the subject will never again be lost for words.