Mumsnet Talk

Is it 'I was sitting in the bedroom' or 'I was sat in the bedroom'?

Is it a dialect thing? I've only ever heard people use the latter up North.

or "I was sat, sitting in the bedroom" ??

<helpful>

Anyone who was "sat" anywhere should be left there, frankly. What on earth is wrong with sitting?

"I was sat" sounds wrong.

It is incorrect grammatically, but used in some dialects. It looks odd in written speech though, IMO, and confuses people who wouldn't usually use it in their own dialect.

To me 'I was sat' doesn't make sense.

You say 'I was cooking' or 'I was driving', ie. 'I was' then the verb in the present tense.

Come on, is anyone going to answer me properly... the suspense is killing me!

I was "sat" is wrong, unless you a piece of furniture than someone has sat somewhere.

I was "sitting" is better, but still wrong as it is transitive. To be correct one should say,

"I was seated."

I suppose you could just about make a case for using it, if somebody had forced you to sit there: "my mother sat me down to talk to me", therefore "I was sat down", but it's stretching a point.

Sorry, posted too soon

you are

It depends on the action taking place. Have you just sat down? Have you been on the seat for some time? Were you placed there by someone else?

rocking could you explain the transitive thing please? <eager to learn>

It is used in northern parts - I've just spent a weekend in Leeds with people telling me 'I were sat in t'bedroom...'

Shit, sorry, not transitive, present continuous.

<slaps self>

As in, the action is happening at the time of speaking/writing - "I am walking", "I am eating", " I am sitting".

Once you have sat down, you have finished sitting, and are now seated.

The action is finished.

You might say:

I was sitting on the sofa when suddenly Benedict Cumberbatch came into the room...

<wakes self up from dream>

It is usual to use the present continuous to indicate an interrupted action in this way.

I loathe "I was sat" with a passion and it crops up so often on MN!

Why is it not called the 'past continuous' ?

rocking The action has already happened. It's 'I was' not 'I am'

Oh help!

As well as the 'northern/dialect' thing, I think it also conveys a degree of 'annoyance' at the fact you were sitting there (usually waiting). So, for example, 'I was sat there waiting for him' as opposed to 'I was sitting there waiting for him' The 'sat' being something you clearly didn't want to be doing where as 'sitting' tends to imply something not entirely unpleasant.

I'm in no way saying this is correct just that it's commonly used that way!

That's why 'I was sitting' is wrong.

It should be 'I was seated'.

But it's better that 'I was sat.'

Well I think it should be either "I was sitting in the bedroom" or "I sat in the bedroom"

But I am northern....

I like a good 'I was sat...' when I'm annoyed about it I really couldn't care less that it's 'wrong'!

Rockin, doesn't that depend on whether you consider that "to sit" only means "the action of going from a standing position to a seated position". If "to sit" is also used to mean "to be seated", then it's ok to use "I was sitting" for a stationary state of being.

If you agree with that, then it's ok to say "I was sitting".

I very often get angered with pedants, but this is the one thing that irrationally pisses me off, dialect or no. I was stood, I was sat. GAH.

You can see all the verb forms here: conjugation.com/verb/Sit

According to oxforddictionaries.com, sit means:

sit

verb (sits, sitting; past and past participle sat /sat/)
1 [no object] adopt or be in a position in which one’s weight is supported by one’s buttocks rather than one’s feet and one’s back is upright...

(my emphasis)

So it doesn't have to be "I was seated". "I was sitting" is also correct.

More importantly, wouldn't you rather have Martin Freeman walk into your bedroom than that Cumberbumberbababatch fellow?

Cumberbatch is over rated.