I am sitting ... I usually sit ...

we were sitting??? She was sitting and reading a book ....

I don't see any need to use the passive voice in this case, or is it a new way to describe a Kamasutra position?

It's theraputic to argue these things about once a year. May I bring up my perennial point that in North America, "I am going to do that" and "I will do that" convey precisely the same thing, with the same certainty? Unless, of course, there is a stress or intonation in either case, such as , "I AM going..." and "I WILL do..." or an adverb that denotes the level of certainty, such as "Shirley."

The only reason things such as this have any importance is when they fail to communicate clearly. A Brit might take an unintended tone of certainty/uncertainty from a Yank, and the American might not realize that when the Brit bloke says, "I will do that" it's certain.

Or have I been misinformed by various British textbooks and Thai ajarns, that there is a difference at all? Surely I am going to need some guidance on this...

The difference between "going to" and will has little to do with certainty as far as I'm concerned. But they do have slightly different uses. Will is more a neutral statement of fact whereas "going to" expresses intention.

"I'm going down the pub later"

"Tomorrow I'll be in a meeting from 10 to 12.

"Don't try calling me at home later, I'll be in the pub."

The last example could be "Don't try calling me at home later, I'm going to the pub." It doesn't make it more certain.

If my memory serves me correctly Americans use will when talking about their future plans more often than us Brits. It may sound a little odd to us but most people probably couldn't point out why. There's no intended difference in meaning I don't think.

Edited March 11, 200719 yr by withnail

"British English", as opposed to English? Surely English will suffice. "American English", yes.

English won't suffice since there are a large number of geographical varieties. There are features common to all, where we will say 'in English' and features only common to certain dialects, such as British English or American English.

You could argue the phrase is 'sub-standard' though I would disagree with the COD and say colloquial is more appropriate. The British National Corpus has 27 tokens for "I was sat" (compared to 197 for 'I was sitting'), and 19 of them are from spoken English, a much higher proportion than normal.

There is a subtle difference between "I was sitting' and 'I was sat'. We tend to use the second for situations over which we have little control, like when we are sat outside the house because we've lost the keys, or are stuck on the bus in a traffic jam. It is not just a sub-standard or colloquial alternative for "I was sitting'.

And incidentally, even is something is sub-standard or colloquial or informal it is still grammatically correct. These terms are to do with register, not syntax.

Why do the Brits get it wrong all the time?

e.g: I was sat on the bus waiting for it to leave and it exploded. Wrong. I am no teacher but isn't that past perfect or something and should be "I was sitting on the bus..."???

Annoys me every time i hear it.

Was sat" is not correct. "Was seated" is. on the bus is also incorrect. in the bus is correct use of english. However English is used and abused globally now , innit ? And the sentence as quoted is perfectly understandable.

ThaiITAgain

'On the bus' is perfectly correct, and twice as common as 'in the bus'. 'Was seated' on the bus would only be correct if you were a little child or a dear old lady, and somebody had physically placed you in the seat.

In and on are also used with means of transportation: in is used with a car, on with public or commercial means of transportation:

in the car

on the bus

on the plane

on the train

on the ship

Some speakers of English make a further distinction for public modes of transportation, using in when the carrier is stationary and on when it is in motion.

My wife stayed in/on the bus while I got out at the rest stop.

The passengers sat in/on the plane awaiting takeoff.

from - http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/esl/eslprep2.html

'On the bus' is perfectly correct, and twice as common as 'in the bus'. 'Was seated' on the bus would only be correct if you were a little child or a dear old lady, and somebody had physically placed you in the seat.

A case of technology overtaking vocabulary, dating back to when buses and trains were open. It's why a ship still sails, although it has none.

Correctly, it should be “I was sat on in the bus”

Yesterday, I travelled by bus. There were not enough seats for all passengers and somebody sat on me. I was sat on in the bus.

It’s the only correct way I can see “I was sat on” being used.

--

Maestro