Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation
Skip to talk navigation

Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Unflip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Unflip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

AIBU?

To shout “No! The Queen was not sat alone!”

154 replies

Saddlesore · 18/04/2021 00:09

I have just been reading some of the online coverage of Prince Philip’s funeral, from some pretty blue-chip websites, and some of them say “The Queen was sat alone...” This is like nails down a blackboard for me (along with “I was stood...”). Surely the Queen was sitting, or was seated?
Of course, there’s an outside chance that the writer made a spelling error and meant to say “The Queen was sad...” - but that goes without saying.

OP posts:

Report

Am I being unreasonable?

588 votes. Final results.

POLL

You are being unreasonable

59%

You are NOT being unreasonable

41%

Twistered · 19/04/2021 17:11

Ah..... in that case then the craic will be ninety !

Alsohuman · 19/04/2021 17:06

Oh give over. Plenty of craic, as you’d expect with one of us hailing from N Ireland.

Twistered · 19/04/2021 17:02

So no craic then

Alsohuman · 19/04/2021 16:54

[quote Twistered]@Alsohuman.

Your house sounds great craic. Not[/quote]
It is. But only other SPAG pedants would appreciate it.

weewitch · 19/04/2021 13:42

Completely agree Op.

Saddlesore · 19/04/2021 10:38

I think grammatical errors in speech are understandable. We don't speak in perfectly formed sentences and many regional dialects have their own "rules" that are barely related to standard rules. I do take issue with grammatical errors in published news providers though, whether in print or online. These are reports and, as such, are written records. If they want to be taken seriously they need to be accurate - in every sense - whether that is in the spelling of people's names, the value attached to a corporate takeover or the score in a football match. Similarly, grammatical accuracy promotes clarity. As some previous posters pointed out, "was sat" is a passive action, ie, the Queen had been picked up by someone and plopped into her seat. Perhaps she was, in which case I'd like to know more. The difference is subtle, but that is what makes this language so rich and nuanced.

OP posts:

Somethingsnappy · 19/04/2021 10:32

[quote Twistered]@Chunkymenrock

Your post has grammar mistakes on a thread that you're correcting someone else's grammar 😂

It's incorrect and not pedantic at all to be irritated by it. It is incorrect.
Its use. It's use

Her Majesty, (as well as the other single people in in the Chapel) . in the chapel.

I think because you have referenced the queen and other people it is were not was[/quote]
Um, no! The writing in bold is correct. You don't use an apostrophe in 'its' when the meaning conveys possession.

longwayoff · 19/04/2021 09:43

Thanks @campion, solidarity the only way ahead but we're a dying breed. If we came back a hundred years from now I wonder whether we'd still understand the everyday English in use.

campion · 19/04/2021 09:16

With you all the way longwayoff. Evidently we are members of an endangered species and so must stick together for safety.

Twistered
Eh? 'It's' is correct in that sentence and 'its' is also correct.
'It's' is only ever a contraction for 'it is' or 'it has'.

DdraigGoch · 19/04/2021 09:02

For those who think spelling and grammar are petty distractions, they are actually vitally important to help understand meaning.

Reading the online edition of Mumsnet's favourite newspaper, I came across this subheading:
"One Type 45 destroyed and an anti-submarine Type 23 frigate will be sent from the Royal Navy's carrier task group in the Mediterranean"

For the benefit of doubt, neither HMS Defender, nor HMS Diamond have been sunk.

Twistered · 19/04/2021 08:45

@Alsohuman.

Your house sounds great craic. Not

Alsohuman · 19/04/2021 08:43

@JackieWeaverHandforthCouncil

I’m so bored of grammar pedants. It must be so stressful for them and super cringey and eye rolley for those closest to them.

Nope. It’s highly enjoyable and being married to another one just makes it all better. Huge fun.

Twistered · 19/04/2021 08:40

@Chunkymenrock

Your post has grammar mistakes on a thread that you're correcting someone else's grammar 😂

It's incorrect and not pedantic at all to be irritated by it. It is incorrect.
Its use. It's use

Her Majesty, (as well as the other single people in in the Chapel) . in the chapel.

I think because you have referenced the queen and other people it is were not was

longwayoff · 19/04/2021 08:34

Let me make your teeth ache. Stacey Dooley, hosting a TV programme the other day and wanting a set of keys returned to her. "May you hand me your keys please?" Meaning 'please give your keys to me'. Or maybe 'will you please give me your keys?' She said it a few times. Someone has presumably scripted this abomination for her to parrot. Or she's been taught that this is a correct way to ask for something, with 'may' being less demanding than 'can you' or 'will you '. May you join me MN pedants in feeling as irritated as I am?

Chunkymenrock · 19/04/2021 08:17

I realise I have written were instead of was!

Chunkymenrock · 19/04/2021 08:14

I agree OP. It's incorrect and not pedantic at all to be irritated by it. Its use is unfortunately becoming more and more common and your screaming stems from a place of constant suppression, where you hear it but never comment because of the reactions demonstrated by most on this thread. I'll scream with you. Her Majesty, (as well as the other single people in in the Chapel) were sitting alone.

skodadoda · 19/04/2021 07:29

@JackieWeaverHandforthCouncil

I’m so bored of grammar pedants. It must be so stressful for them and super cringey and eye rolley for those closest to them.

‘Bored with’ is better style 🤣

JackieWeaverHandforthCouncil · 18/04/2021 22:50

I’m so bored of grammar pedants. It must be so stressful for them and super cringey and eye rolley for those closest to them.

Misshapencha0s · 18/04/2021 22:44

Yawn!

Get a grip.

Plumedenom · 18/04/2021 22:42

I'll stop now.

Plumedenom · 18/04/2021 22:41

Anyway, rumour has it there was a bloke with big hair sitting quite close by anyway, because someone overheard them say "Roy'll guard her"

Plumedenom · 18/04/2021 22:38

I agree that there is a time and a plaid for this.
Personally, I corgi worked up by it.
Maybe they duked around the grammar to avoid countroversy?
Bet only Liz knows.

spikyplants2021 · 18/04/2021 22:14

[quote OwlBeThere]@spikyplants2021

"Sat" is the past tense: "he sat" or past participle: "he was sat (upon) by (someone). The imperfect tense is "he was sitting/seated".
You cannot change "he was laughing" to "he was laughed" either. 'He was laughed at' is another thing altogether. "He was seated" or "he was sitting" are standard English, "he was sat" is dialect. It is ungrammatical.[/quote]
Ah thank you.

skodadoda · 18/04/2021 21:43

@namesnamesnamesnames

The Queen sat
The Queen was sitting

I know which sounds much nicer and more correct.

I like The Queen was seated, but that implies she had no choice in the matter.

👍

skodadoda · 18/04/2021 21:39

@StormzyinaTCup

It's talking past tense is it not?
It could have done without the 'was' so that it read 'the Queen sat alone' or maybe it was a typo error where they were going to put 'the Queen was sitting alone' but changed it to 'sat' and forgot to remove the 'was'?

That’s the benevolent response. Poor grammar is far too common.

Unflip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.