I know the question itself is awkward! I was going to write something like the sentences below, but I was not sure about the punctuation.

1.Evidence on something is scant in global and almost non-existent in national scale.

2.Evidence on something is scant in global, and almost non-existent in national, scale.

  • (a) Both would be correct were 'in global / national scale' acceptable. Use whichever aids parsing / reflects smooth speech patterns better (you might have to choose). (b) I'd use non-existent. Oct 31, 2017 at 10:28
  • What does 'sth' mean? I can't find it in the dictionary. Oct 31, 2017 at 12:46
  • @Clare "sth" is short for "something."
    – user264611
    Oct 31, 2017 at 13:41
  • Thank you @EdwinAshworth I actually wanted to combine "scant in global scale and almost non-existent in national scale" so to make an elliptical phrase with "scale" as the base. And sorry if my descriptions of technical grammatical terms suck!
    – user264611
    Oct 31, 2017 at 13:42
  • 2
    Simpler is better: Scant evidence exists nationally or internationally for [etc.]. Not sure scale is right here.
    – Lambie
    Jun 30, 2018 at 15:19

1 Answer 1


Unless, on something' is there to indicate that you would be including details there, it doesn't add anything and could be omitted, and the order seems to be the wrong way round. I should give the information about the lack of evidence from the smaller area to the larger, for comparison, e.g. 'Evidence is almost non-existent in national scale, and scant (even)in a global scale'.

  • 1
    in a national scale is not idiomatic.
    – Lambie
    Jun 30, 2018 at 15:18
  • I would use "on" rather than "in".
    – Hot Licks
    Dec 17, 2020 at 23:23

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.