to think there is a substantial difference between these apologies?

[GretaGip]

"I'm sorry if I upset you."

"I'm sorry that I upset you."

I know I'm probably being a bit oversensitive, but I think the first apology is inadequate, and the apologiser thinks I'm being semantic.

Yes, yse, it's a tiny problem in the scheme of things, but this has really botherd me this evening, and I'm still upset over what necessitated the apology.

AIBU?

Actually they are both rubbish. Neither is "I am sorry for what I did".

Grr, I hate non-apologies. "I'm sorry you were upset" is blatantly NOT the same as "I'm sorry I upset you".

I'm sure all this "I hear what you're saying" bollocks started in the 90s. My then boss was a genius at making you think he was actually going to take on board your suggestions/listening to a complaint, and it was only after a conversation had finished that I realised I'd been conned!

I think if you perceive a difference between the two wordings then it either isn't intended as a real apology (I.e. it's intended as a placebo) or you are over sensitive (and I'm not saying you are! Only you will know for definite!)

If it were a real apology ( accompanied by genuinely apologetic tone of voice, behaviour etc) I think you wouldn't care about the wording.

So if you are worried about the wording then maybe there is something else going on?