Here are two similar sentences:

  1. A is resulted from B.
  2. A results from B.

Are they both correct, and do they have the same meaning? If so, which one is more natrual.

  • 1
    The first is incorrect. Resulted is a verb, but you are trying to use it as an adjective. You can however say that A resulted from B, or you can use "result" as a noun: A is a result of B.
    – Billy Kerr
    Aug 28, 2023 at 9:16

2 Answers 2

  1. Is very unnatural. I would say "A resulted from B", or instead I might say "A is a resultant of B". The issue here is conflicting tense between "is" and "resulted". You might also say "A has resulted from B". Since "has" and "resulted" would both be past tense.

  2. This is correct. It is equivalent to what I wrote for #1.

The only difference is tense. When you say "results" you could be talking about what "will happen" or what "has happened previously". But you are not necessarily speaking about one situation or the other.

When you say is a "resultant of", the implication is more clearly meant to be "this has happened, and I have observed the outcome".


1.A is resulted from B.

2.A results from B.

The first sentence is wrong. The second sentence is correct.

I found on Collins dictionary the following sentence 1:

Many hair problems result from what you eat.

The phrase is resulted is wrong. We don't use that phrase in English language. You can say 'A resulted from B.'

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .