Crap English
The amount of posts on here that contain the word "sat" when they clearly mean "sitting" is staggering. Actually, not just on here, but fucking everywhere.

I don't remember Otis Redding singing "Sat on the dock of the bay"

At a parents' evening, an English teacher was regaling me about how my daughter "was sat at the back of the class..."
Oh was she now? Who by? I muttered "sitting" and she smiled "yes, sitting at the back" but there was a distinct air of clenched teeth and the possibility she might add "..you smug prick..".
Still, if the English teacher can't speak her own bastard language properly, what hope is there for the kids in her class?

The same goes for stood/standing.
Did The Beatles sing:

"Now I'll never dance with another (whooh)
Since I saw her stood there "
No they never did they?

I've just thought of another. People who say "Could of" when they mean "Could've".
Could of? That doesn't even make sense.
( sandettie light vessel automatic New Twitter - @bollocksreally, Fri 2 May 2008, 18:51, 5 replies)

I used "sat" in my post twice, probably incorrectly.
However I refuse to correct it. Common usage has its place in defining language, especially in posts like this and everyday conversation.

I also noticed that you misspelled "amount" in the original version of your post. I guess my pet peeve is people that complain about poor English skills but don't proofread.
(Captain Skippy pooed in a bag and left it on your doorstep, Fri 2 May 2008, 19:01, closed)

I know what you mean
I did click edit and go back and change it (and add more).
It didn't help that my mate spilt a glass of white wine on my keyboard either.

"The common usage defining the language" does ring true. However, common errors do not, they just degrade the language.

People couldn't get away with saying 7x8 is 54 or that Pi is about 4, I can't see why language is any different.
( sandettie light vessel automatic New Twitter - @bollocksreally, Fri 2 May 2008, 19:10, closed)

It's difficult to differentiate between "errors" and usage though
Even going back just a hundred years (maybe more to be fair, we'll call it a hundred and fifty) there is a huge difference between how people even spelled words. Were they wrong? Right?

The "long s" stands out as an example, of course.

"Could of" does bug me, but the vast majority of the time I find that people who use that end up realising that it's just plain daft, but when you think about it, it does have a certain amount of logic to it. Written language has always evolved through the written interpretation of vocal words, and I wouldn't be surprised if, with a little digging I could find a few similar examples from many years previous.
(Captain Skippy pooed in a bag and left it on your doorstep, Fri 2 May 2008, 19:20, closed)

hmm
Is it fair to say that the evolution of spelling from previous centuries was down to the widespread illiteracy of the time? Once regular schooling came to the masses, spellings became standardised.
( sandettie light vessel automatic New Twitter - @bollocksreally, Fri 2 May 2008, 19:23, closed)

If "sat" and "sitting" annoy you
avoid Perth, Scotland. The birthplace of "jamp" instead of "jumped". It was always funny watching english teachers tear out their hair over that.
(Malcav, Tue 6 May 2008, 13:15, closed)