Just found this topic apologies in advance for my errors.

[marmarmalade]

What I don't understand is the English ( UK?) habit of occasionally using a past tense verb in a present tense sentence. I assume this has been raised before and I apologise ( my search function does not seem to work at all) but I was wondering why?

Example" I'm just stood her waiting for the bus".
I'm not sure I've seen the words "standing " or "sitting" very much at all on mumsnet. It appears to be always "stood" or "sat".
Just asking out of interest.

I see "I've took" "I rung" and "He's wrote" on here, and a couple of times in real life I've heard an English person say "If I'd gave".
I was brought up in an ex-colony to see British people as superior to me and my countrymen, so it always shocks me to see and hear British adults speaking and writing like children who haven't quite got the hang of their own language yet.
Non-native learners of English are taught to recite "give gave given", "ring rang rung" "write wrote written" and so on, but British people aren't held to the same standard.
It's one of the benefits of your ancestors conquering most of the world in the past, I suppose.

Aaah! Ex-colonial here too!!!! It stands out when you aren't used to it.

You're both correct, as you know! I'm one of the native Brits who share your exasperation. There are plenty of us; we tend to be in the older generations. Our education system downgraded the importance of syntax, grammar and spelling for a few decades around the Millennium. While the curriculum now requires a higher standard, most of the teachers are ill-equipped to deliver it because they were educated in the "never mind" system.

Brits still have a depressing tendency to complain when people in other countries can't speak English, despite having a poor grasp of it themselves and knowing no other languages. I apologise for us all.

It's the weird phrasal verbs that change things. "I have just eaten a sandwich" is perfectly standard English. It's the present perfect sense, used to talk about something in the recent past. Similarly, "I've just stood on a piece of Lego" is standard use of present perfect.

So onto non-standard. The words "have just" act as auxiliary verbs in the above sentences. Without these, the tense changes. "I stood on a piece of Lego" may have happened at any time in the past.

So there is some logic to changing the phrasal verb to change the meaning. "I am stood in the corner" is clearly is happening in the present tense, because of the phrasal verb "am." It is non-standard English, but it actual conveys a different meaning in certain dialects. It implies a lack of agency. Perhaps someone put you in the corner? Perhaps you feel powerless to move away? It certainly conveys a different meaning to "I am standing in the corner." This is widely understood in some parts of the UK.

Non-standard English is not wrong if it conveys meaning. It is not a sign of lack of intelligence or pitiful education. Many people use non-standard English, knowing full well it's not a technically correct construction of the language. Yes, it makes things hard for foreign language learners, or even people who move from one English-speaking country to another. But it isn't lamentable or a sign that English people are bad at their own language. All languages develop over time. The formal codifying of language is a quite modern invention, and one that does not have a method for keeping up with changes in language over time.

Gonna disagree with you, @Thisismynewusernamedoyoulikeit ...

Using your example: "to stand" can be transitive as well as intransitive. You could say "he stood me in a corner" or "I was stood in a corner", both meaning someone put you in the corner. If you mean to describe a position you put yourself in, you can say you were standing or you stood. What you can never correctly say is "I am stood in the corner".

We sometimes use verbs (and adjectives, adverbs) incorrectly for dramatic or comic effect. The example using "to stand" would be "I was just stood standing there". The superfluous "stood" introduces an exaggerated sense of inaction, but it's supposed to be comical.

Non-standard English is not wrong if it conveys meaning.

I disagree because non-standard usage increases the likelihood of misunderstanding. In fact, it often conveys a meaning other than what the speaker intended. The purpose of language is to communicate; misunderstandings are symptoms of failure to do so.

The formal codifying of language is a quite modern invention

Babylonian ~ 1800 BC
Sanskrit ~ 500 BC
Greek ~ 100 BC
Latin ~ 100 AD
Arabic ~ 500 AD
Irish ~ 600 AD
... and so on!

There is another thread discussing this issue with even more responses.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/pedants_corner/5065514-i-was-sat

Interestingly, this usage is not a feature of American English. I only mention this because often non-standard usages are assumed to be American imports on MN.

What you can never correctly say is "I am stood in the corner".

You could, if it was a reply to someone asking “What happens every time you get something wrong?”

Your examples aren't phrasal verbs. Phrasal verbs are verb + preposition/adverb and can be in any tense or aspect.

Present Perfect has 3 uses:

Indefinite past and finished time-

"I have been to America" cf "I went to America last year" (past simple- if the past time is specified, it's not present perfect) This use of the PP is where we find some adverbs indicating indefinite past time (just, already, yet etc) not always recent past, but by definition of the adverb, often is.

Finished past event with effect in the present

"I've cut my hair"
"The plane has crashed"

Unfinished past

I've studied French since I was a child/I've studied French for ten years.

I do agree with you (though prescriptivists won't) that "I was stood" (though non-standard) isn't wrong, and conveys a nuance of meaning that "I was standing" or "I stood" doesn't)

They tend to be regional informal usage IME. So you'll find them on here (and they'll jar because it's not what you say, but your own informal language will jar to others) but not in formal articles, books etc.

I like reading non standard English. It helps me imagine the voice behind the post. It would be sad if everyone used English in exactly the same way.

Haha, yes! It would be odd, not incorrect.

"It's the weird phrasal verbs that change things. "I have just eaten a sandwich" is perfectly standard English. ....
So onto non-standard. The words "have just" act as auxiliary verbs...
Non-standard English is not wrong if it conveys meaning... Many people use non-standard English, knowing full well it's not a technically correct construction of the language. ...

'When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean'.

@Thisismynewusernamedoyoulikeit, you have a different definition of a phrasal verb from everybody else, and a slightly different definition of auxiliary, and of verb ("just' is an adverb). It really does impede your communication.

Language evolves and phrases like “I’ve been sat here for 10 minutes” have firmly entered into Southern English if not elsewhere.
It is no different to the rapid inclusion of English words or phases into French.
Language evolves all the time; it is neither a good or bad thing.

Yes but 'I've been sat here for 10 minutes' kind of implies you've been there with no choice, eg waiting for something, so it kind of makes sense that someone or something has has put you there in which case I think it's ok? Or maybe I'm massively projecting!!

It has been rather a long time since I have used/particularly thought about these things. So I clearly made some mistakes. I appreciate the other poster, who pointed this out reasonably.

At least I wasn't pointlessly rude like you.

Perhaps I should have stuck to my main point: non-standard English exists and has purpose and meaning.

@Garlicker
We'll have to agree to disagree over the use of non-standard English having a purpose. I do agree that it can impede communication, but it can also enhance it. Non-standard English can communicate things that standard English cannot; it can indicate a sense of belonging to a group.

I completely take your points about my incorrect use of grammar terminology. You probably would be unsurprised to know that I was at school in the two decades around the millennium so have only attempted to learn formal grammar in adulthood. I clearly have some way to go! Thanks for correcting and to @ASighWasMadeOfStone too.

Non-standard English can communicate things that standard English cannot; it can indicate a sense of belonging to a group.

True. And this is why many of us learn code-switching from an early age. Growing up in the Southern US, my brother and I spoke differently at home than we did on the playground.

Thanks all, I'm not sure I'm any the wiser but it seems to be a regional UK thing. I was just wondering as on MN it seems a totally normal, completely regular way of phrasing a sentence. I will read the thread that was linked too. I agree with pp that it jumps out at me as no doubt some of my ( non UK) usage does to UK people ( e.g. that sentence I just wrote was terribly structured 😅). Also agree it does makes the language more interesting.

@Thisismynewusernamedoyoulikeit

I wasn't pointlessly rude like you.

Oh, no! My first thought was that you're writing gibberish because you don't understand the terms you're using, and that rather proves the OP's point about British people not speaking English very well. I tried really hard to find a nicer way to say it, but it clearly didn't work.
Was it the Lewis Carroll quote that offended you? It all seemed fairly mild mannered to me.

@marmarmalade

I don't believe it's a regional difference or a dialect issue because I've seen internet discussions among US users defending the use of "I have went". They called it a colloquialism and it was obviously what they were used to hearing and saying. It would be quite a coincidence that a common primary-school-level mistake also happens to be a regionalism in two different countries.

Interesting

You’re not wrong to find those usages jarring. They are. They’re wrong!

Not surprising at all that a regional colloquialism in Ireland and/or Scotland would find it's way to the US, surely?

I'm Irish from Dublin and would never use "I have went" but my Northern Irish DH does all the time, even though his English would typically be better than mine. I hear it much more here than I did growing up.