0
Martin Stromberg Posted 16 years ago
Grammar
Usage of stood where standing seem more adequate
Hi!
I recently encountered a somewhat strange usage of the verb (to) stand. I first took notice of this phenomenon in the song Underwear by Pulp which features the following lines:
"I'd give my whole life to see it
Just you stood there
Only in your underwear"
Removing the irrelevant parts and rewriting it a bit to a more consise form (while preserving the original context) leaves us with the sentance "I'd like to see you stood there". To my ears, "I'd like to see you standing there" sounds correct - even if that form of the verb doesn't give quite the same enjoyment when sung in this particular piece.
I appreciate that songwriters and poets sometimes bend the language in a way that would better fit into their texts, however, I want to recall having encountered similar usage of stand (and also sit) in spoken English. I think that this form is chiefly british and possibly even regionally unique to nothern England (e.g. Yorkshire).
An example of this phenomenon with another verb would be something like: "I was sat in the park".
I asked my teacher if she knew why some people opt to use stood or sat rather than the -ing form, but this kind of usage was apparently previously unbeknownst to her.
To me, saying stood or sat emphasises the act of standing or sitting (the posture) while the -ing forms simply states that you were positioned in a given place.
Seen as how I'm merely a student and not a native speaker, it is fully plausible that I've overcomplicated the matter and, if that is the case, I appologise for wasting your time.
To summarise: Why do some people prefer using stood/sat rather than standing or sitting?
Kind regards,
Martin
I recently encountered a somewhat strange usage of the verb (to) stand. I first took notice of this phenomenon in the song Underwear by Pulp which features the following lines:
"I'd give my whole life to see it
Just you stood there
Only in your underwear"
Removing the irrelevant parts and rewriting it a bit to a more consise form (while preserving the original context) leaves us with the sentance "I'd like to see you stood there". To my ears, "I'd like to see you standing there" sounds correct - even if that form of the verb doesn't give quite the same enjoyment when sung in this particular piece.
I appreciate that songwriters and poets sometimes bend the language in a way that would better fit into their texts, however, I want to recall having encountered similar usage of stand (and also sit) in spoken English. I think that this form is chiefly british and possibly even regionally unique to nothern England (e.g. Yorkshire).
An example of this phenomenon with another verb would be something like: "I was sat in the park".
I asked my teacher if she knew why some people opt to use stood or sat rather than the -ing form, but this kind of usage was apparently previously unbeknownst to her.
To me, saying stood or sat emphasises the act of standing or sitting (the posture) while the -ing forms simply states that you were positioned in a given place.
Seen as how I'm merely a student and not a native speaker, it is fully plausible that I've overcomplicated the matter and, if that is the case, I appologise for wasting your time.
To summarise: Why do some people prefer using stood/sat rather than standing or sitting?
Kind regards,
Martin
Top answer
" I don't think it's the "stood" that's strange. I'd give my whole life to see it. You stood there only in your underwear.
- " I don't think it's the "stood" that's strange.
- I'd give my whole life to see it.
- You stood there only in your underwear.
- What's the big deal?
- [H] I don't know the song.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
9 Answers
0
Martin Stromberg"I'd give my whole life to see itIf you want a sensible sentence, "just" delete the "just."
Just you stood there
Only in your underwear"
I don't think it's the "stood" that's strange.
I'd give my whole life to see it.
You stood there only in your underwear. What's the big deal? [H]
00
Thank you for your swift reply Avangi.
It could be that this isn't strange at all, I just thought it sounded a bit peculiar.
I do not know what the guidelines for linking to material that could possibly be subject to copyright infringement and if posting a youtube-link is against the rules I shall remove it. In any case, here is a link to the aforementioned song:
It could be that this isn't strange at all, I just thought it sounded a bit peculiar.
I do not know what the guidelines for linking to material that could possibly be subject to copyright infringement and if posting a youtube-link is against the rules I shall remove it. In any case, here is a link to the aforementioned song:
00
Hi, Martin. Thanks for coming back on this. Yes, I see your point.
Hopefully, our British contingent will weigh in on this.
I don't hear it in the US, but I believe I've come across it in print.
Offhand, I don't see a grammatical explanation for it, but let me ponder on it.
I'm equally unsure about giving a good answer on your copyright question. I used to worry about
Hopefully, our British contingent will weigh in on this.
I don't hear it in the US, but I believe I've come across it in print.
Offhand, I don't see a grammatical explanation for it, but let me ponder on it.
I'm equally unsure about giving a good answer on your copyright question. I used to worry about
00
I have never heard "I was sat" used to mean "I was sitting," but I have heard people use it instead of "I was seated" (as in "someone seated me there"). It drives me crazy! "I was sat so far back in the theater that I couldn't hear anything." ( I realize it's a fine distinction, because of course if you have been seated somewhere you are, in fact, sitting there, but I am thinking of "
00
khoff"I was sat so far back in the theater that I couldn't hear anything."I suppose the same could be said of "stood" where small children are concerned. "Someone stood me there."
Both "to seat" and "to stand" are transitive in this usage.
But I think the intention of the OP's examples is clearly intransitive.
"I was stood" is used in the sam
00
Well, that's even stranger, in my opinion. I hope that doesn't take hold over here!
00
In that context I was stood/I was sat is perfectly normal and correct usage in Northern English. See Arnold Bennett for examples.
00
Franklin Merrell-Wolff, a master, among other things, of English language (albeit he was American), says in his atonishing work Pathways Through to Space:"I found that a conceptual coordination, produced while one stood or sat before an audience, released, concomitantly, a current-like quality that had, among other features, the effect of holding the audience in a kind of stillness which I
00
Hi Martin,
It is indeed predominantly used in the north of England. Grammatically, it is considered 'non-standard'. The use of 'stood' and 'sat' are used in this way because although they are verbs, they are describing a state rather than an action, as verbs usually do. When one is standing, or sitting, not much is happening, as compared to for example running or cooking. This is the reas
It is indeed predominantly used in the north of England. Grammatically, it is considered 'non-standard'. The use of 'stood' and 'sat' are used in this way because although they are verbs, they are describing a state rather than an action, as verbs usually do. When one is standing, or sitting, not much is happening, as compared to for example running or cooking. This is the reas
0
Related Questions