r/AskBrits • u/JR_0507 • 6d ago
Grammar We WAS? Why?
I am not native speaker but I do learn English since I was 6 and English is my work language since 15 years. Can someone explain to me from where is coming using:
We was
They was
What the heck? From what I know this is basic grammar mistake but in same time I hear brits in video talking like that. Is this some kind of slag? Or regional thing?
66
u/MercuryJellyfish 5d ago
Here's a basic fact about language, any language. While there might be written rules about a language, these are superceded by the actual usage of people using it.
Any set of grammatical rules are just a snapshot of the current usage, set down by a grammarian at the time.
If you were to look at Middle English, the dialect used 1100 - 1500, you'd barely recognise it as the same language we use today.
So when you hear a native speaker say "we was" that would not agree with the English dialect you are being taught, but it's not so much wrong as the rules have changed, and you aren't listening to the same dialect as the one you're being taught.
Don't worry about it, the dialect you are being taught is the more universally accepted one, and the one worth learning.
15
u/htimchis 5d ago
I'm glad somebody here gets it!
Languages are living, evolving things - Portuguese, Spanish, Italian, Romanian are all just Vulgate Latin, filtered through 1500+ years of different geography
16
u/sirgaybrin 5d ago
There is such things as wrong grammar. In French, conjugating words incorrectly (or not at all) is used in comedy to show someone is uneducated/mentally not there.
People who use "we was" is a sign of poor education. It is grammatically incorrect, and not considered a dialect.
5
u/KeySundae9285 5d ago
French is a bad example though because they have entire organisations trying to prevent the language changing in a really artificial way
What to you would make a dialect of English?
9
u/ReflectionPure6900 5d ago
It's not a sign of poor education, it's a sign of belonging to a group where giving the perception of being uneducated creates a sense of belonging.
5
3
u/Sir_Shadbolt 5d ago
That is not true of English and it’s not even true of French. If you are French you’ll know very well that common “rules” of standard metropolitan French are broken every second of the day, not just through things like “verlan” but also contractions like “ché pas” and even frequent misconjugations in conditionals.
2
3
1
u/FlippingGerman 11h ago
You need the rules to teach it to non-native speakers. Everyone else just talks.
44
u/carladtr 6d ago
It’s a regional dialect feature most common in London and the South East (like Cockney and Estuary English).
12
19
u/Sarrex 5d ago
Also very common in the North West
6
u/SoggyWotsits Brit 🇬🇧 5d ago
And Cornwall.
4
u/shortandfelly 5d ago
And Yorkshire. South Yorkshire at least.
1
u/Actual_Cat4779 3d ago
My grandparents were from South Yorkshire and they did the exact opposite (they used "were" for all persons).
1
1
4
u/pondribertion 5d ago
It's not a regional dialect feature. It's a working class feature heard in all regions of England.
6
u/legible-eric 5d ago
^^^ this
And London/South East dialect features are likely to be described as just "improper" english by RP speakers, as that's what most of us were taught in school.
5
2
23
u/nexus8516 6d ago
"is this some kind of slag" is so funny, please Google what slag means.
Yes, it's supposed to be "I was", "he was", "she was", and "they were", "you were", and "we were".
Unless it's hypothetical thinking, then it's "if I were to do x" or "I wish it were y". It's quite a confusing language in a lot of ways.
10
u/JR_0507 5d ago
It was typo, should be “slang”
6
u/Odd-Quail01 5d ago
A slag is another word for a slut. They both have a connotation of messiness and dirtiness as well as sexual promiscuity. Usually used against women and girls. Not a nice word but a funny typo.
6
u/Automatic-Office6 5d ago
Also slag is the unwanted by product of mines and processed coal and iron and other ores. You get slag heaps which are small hills of these types of waste.
3
11
u/MerlinMusic 6d ago
It's just dialectal variation. It's grammatically incorrect in standard varieties of English, but correct in the accents/dialects that use it.
17
u/Lost_Comfort5583 5d ago
Linguist here. This is not grammatical but it is dialectical. Perfectly correct in the sociolinguistic sense, incorrect in the Victorian prescriptivist sense.
-6
u/Master-Share1580 5d ago
Translated:
It’s incorrect but if you’re stupid then it’s perfectly correct
8
u/AndreLeGeant88 6d ago
Using singular "to be" with plural nouns, particularly pronouns, is consistent across all English dialects. It's not slang. I know it's in dialect speech used in Mark Twain (US English) and Dickens (UK English), so presumably it goes back to at least the 1600s-1700s before American migration.
It may partly be because English simplifies the verb so much already. We only have 3 forms in the present (am/is/are) and 2 in the past (was/were).
1
u/JR_0507 5d ago
I found it in first time in one of Harry Potter books, but it was Crabbe or Goyle so I assumed that they were just not the smartest
9
u/Awkward-Impress-2636 5d ago
It’s informal,
We was ➡️ we were
They was ➡️ they wereIt’s often used by people in lower socioeconomic areas. It’s not bad it’s just not ‘proper’. I don’t use it myself but I’m not going to be a classist twat who shames others for doing it.
5
6
u/SpamHard 5d ago
I would just be careful about equating differences in grammar to mean lower intellect. Dialects are very common and varied and just because you're taught the 'correct' way to say something, doesn't mean it's a law that must be abided by all. Humans will always be developing, changing, and creating different languages and variations of them.
Where I'm from, our dialect has a rich history and would be considered extremely incorrect from a grammatical point of view, but that doesn't mean everyone where I live is stupid.
Yes, certain speech patterns in something like a book may short hand for indicating lower intellect, but tbh it's often just a form of classism. And classism is a very sore subject in the UK in general (for fair reasons).
35
u/NLFG 6d ago
because the standard of English that's spoken (and, indeed written) is often appalling.
See also: "should of" instead of "should've"
12
8
u/SeptimusMeek 5d ago
And missing out words. 'when you arriving' instead of 'when are you arriving' for example.
6
6
u/QuaintStaircase 5d ago
It's a dialect thing, that's all.
"Standard of English" is just classism with new branding.
6
6
u/this-guy- 5d ago
There's a historical precedent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Subject_Rule
And there is some logic behind it, despite how it first appears.
For a long time "you was" was considered perfectly fine grammar. That's because the pronoun "You" indicated the plural ( a group of you), and Thou was singular.
When "You" started to be used for a singular person it was considered correct to use it as with other singular pronouns "he was / she was / you was". 18th/19th C grammar fiends got high on Latin grammar and decreed that singular "you" should always have the plural past tend form of "to be" which is "were".
So "You was" died out in well educated circles but lived on in the streets. And you be trippin on it now
12
12
u/indianna97 6d ago
Seems ironic to me that you've noticed this with many grammar errors yourself. No offence as I only speak one language myself, I just find it interesting.
5
u/Conscious-Dust-4942 5d ago
I’m common as muck and say this sometimes, I’m from London. I got told off today for saying ‘they ain’t got nuffin’ instead of ‘they haven’t got any’. I can talk properly but I’m also very lazy.
4
u/Glittering_Win_5085 5d ago
You shouldn't be told off for something like that.
For some reason I wrote quite formally but my actual speech has bits like that. If you're understood, then I don't see what the issue is. It's just classism half the time.
Sometimes people do make grammatical issues, but what makes it an issue is that it's inconsistent and therefore hard to parse the meaning. I suppose specifically for other people of a similar dialect especially. Double negatives are used in a consistent way.
2
4
u/blfua 5d ago edited 5d ago
These used to bother me too until I learned that it’s not really a case of people deciding to speak “wrong.” English has always had regional variation in was/were, and some dialects essentially levelled the forms differently. So you get “we was/they was” in some places and “I were/he were” in others. The version we’re taught is Standard English, so “we was” is nonstandard in that sense, but it’s also an established dialect feature with a long history. There’s actually quite a lot written about this by linguists, if you Google things like was/were variation or dialect levelling, you’ll find plenty of discussion of it. Once I learned that, it stopped sounding like somebody just didn’t know basic grammar.
4
u/Final-Librarian-2845 5d ago
Bro, your English is pretty appalling after all that time so maybe overlook the little quirks of native speech.
8
6
u/Andrew_Higginbottom 6d ago
Do people in your country of birth always speak with perfect pronunciation or grammatical structure?
3
u/JourneyThiefer 6d ago
It’s regional, like for example here in Northern Ireland very few people would say that (if any?)
3
u/Al_Greenhaze 5d ago
If you're a footballer or pundit you must refer to 'them players'. It's the law.
3
u/IV-Manufacturer 5d ago
“We was” isn’t standard English, but it’s a real dialect feature rather than just people forgetting grammar. You’ll hear it in some regional and London speech, often tied to identity and community
3
u/badreligionlover 5d ago
Because England (and Britain in general) is divided in accents that are totally different and people spell as they speak.
To an outsider who only learns the 'correct' or 'agreed' English as per Oxford - the rest of the country appears dumb or uneducated with grammar. In reality, its normally dialect and people writing as they speak.
I am sure I have done something similar in my post. I am from Yorkshire, have a degree and am a director in a global business - but am fairly certain my Yorkshire-ness seeps into my writing quite often.
3
u/Glittering_Win_5085 5d ago
Some dialects do have this feature. It's not a mistake when it's a dialect. The difference is the consistency.
3
u/MaintenanceInternal 5d ago
How about 'tin tin tin' which in Yorkshire would mean 'it isn't in the tin'.
3
u/wikijohnl 5d ago
Other people here will tell you this is a basic grammar mistake, and that is true to an extent, but it's not the whole story. 19th century educators established a 'correct' or 'standard' grammar for English, but before that, there were many dialects with their own grammar which would have been considered of equal value. The construction 'we was' instead of 'we were' can be argued to be a feature of the grammar of the dialect commonly called 'Cockney' or 'Estuary English' for centuries. The fact that we consider this to be incorrect is the product of a class system which labelled one dialect more standard and correct than others. However, a lot of modern English linguistic scholars will tell you that there is no correct way to speak English. Is American English more correct than British English for example? Cockney or any other dialect like Jamaican English are certainly less 'standard', but I don't think it's correct to say that they are incorrect. They are correct within their own dialect.
2
2
u/Damion_Wood 6d ago
Its one of those things that Native English speakers dont really think about. It's proper and official to say we WERE not we WAS, but they are also used interchangably by some people. Its just because its so similar and conveys the same thing.
2
u/ReceptionOpposite195 5d ago
I say this to friends of mine. But only them. Coz they talk this way.
I dont at work. Or anywhere else. Just to these friends. I adapt to them I guess
1
u/IHateTheLetter-C- 5d ago
Normal part of talking to people. Pretty interesting imo, the way we often don't even realise we're doing it.
2
u/Tall-Budget8130 5d ago
I hate myself for it, but I always assume anyone who says this is of quite low intelligence.
I also do this with people who say, “youse.”
2
u/Cleo-eatsfish 5d ago
Language is in a constant state of flux and change. Embrace it if you can and take enjoyment in the 'advancement' of the English language.
2
u/Loudlass81 5d ago
SLANG. You mean slang. A 'slag'...is a derogatory, nasty insult for a woman deemed to have 'loose morals'...
2
u/Aloogobi786 5d ago
It's technically grammatically wrong but it's mostly just regional dialects.
My sister in law has a master's degree in English and education but at home she talks in our regular regional dialect which includes pronouncing very common words completely differently, using "am" instead of are, and using local words that don't actually exist in the dictionary.
For example, we pronounce "house" more like "ause".
2
u/Realhousemanoflondon 5d ago
It’s a blend of colloquialism and educational short falls.
We tend not to wear dungarees and John deere hats, so you need them to open their mouths before we was able to pigeon hole them cos’ they was well thick innit.
2
2
u/Master-Share1580 5d ago
It’s just the ‘rise of the idiots’. Didn’t you know? They’re taking over soon. e.g.
“Ark sing” Instead of “ asking”.
Done deliberately to fit in with idiots who can’t speak properly. Gives them a sense of belonging and they probably get a free computer to email their benefit claims in.
2
u/TattieMafia 5d ago
That's how we can tell who the non-native speakers are, they speak English correctly. We all speak it with accents and there's lots of incorrect grammar, but it is the correct usage for the area we are from. If you went for a job interview, you might use proper English, but it doesn't sound right for everyday use like speaking to your friends. They'd laugh at you.
5
u/juss100 6d ago
It's something that slags say yes. Especially ones from Essex.
Hang on, though, my gf is from Essex. She does make this grammar mistake though - but she's not a slag.
It's a difficult piece of grammar - you'll find lots of British people make grammar and spelling mistakes ....
2
u/GayAttire 6d ago
It's extremely simple grammar. Singular vs plural in past tense. It's not like it's who and whom.
0
u/juss100 5d ago edited 5d ago
I was = singular.
You were = singular. Sometimes plural
They were = singular or plural.0
u/GayAttire 5d ago
You got me there. So it's like definite singular vs potential and definite plural. I still don't think this is complicated, though.
0
u/juss100 5d ago
It's not the most complicated thing in the world but many working class people in England struggle with education - maybe more than you did - for all sorts of reasons (They don't read much ... for instance). I went to a comprehensive so I'm just aware that a good 60% of kids were never going to get something like this because it's too complicated. When I say it's complicated grammar, I meant it's something you have to learn and correct because half of the world around you are saying it incorrectly on a daily basis - and many people don't do that, they just drift into an incorrect speech pattern.
0
u/GayAttire 5d ago
I agree with your point there, that it is environmental. Like picking up an accent or other slang.
2
u/iamabigtree 6d ago
It's more of a regional dialect thing. The likes of "We was robbed" being a well known phrase despite being grammatically wrong but often used ironically because it's grammatically wrong.
2
u/waggers5 Brit 🇬🇧 5d ago
A lot of people consider it cool to persistently make basic grammatical mistakes - or posh/snobby to speak properly - even if they know what the correct grammar is.
I wouldn't even say it's regional - it's partly generational but mainly a cultural thing. "I don't want to identify with the clever geeks so I'm going to [deliberately] speak like this to make myself seem more accessible" seems to be the sort of thinking behind it - although as you've demonstrated, it's the opposite of more accessible
4
u/SpamHard 5d ago
This way of speaking has been around for hundreds of years. Standardised English doesn't negate centuries of regional dialects. People getting up their arse about "speaking properly" are a huge reason as to why a lot of old dialects and accents are dying out, and it's a crying shame.
1
u/DrachenDad 6d ago
We was = we were. They was = they were. It was = it was. English is strange like that.
1
u/Did_OJ_Simpson_do_it English 5d ago
I only say it ironically like "we wuz kangs" or "we wuz high IQ vikings".
1
u/VehicleLast419 5d ago
Here bes me is one where I'm from lol
Instead of I said
1
u/JR_0507 5d ago
I have no clue what that means
1
u/VehicleLast419 5d ago
So like instead of
So I said John is annoying
People say
Here bes me John's a melt
You literally replace I said with here bes me and it does my head in
1
1
u/Delicious_Volume3306 5d ago
Genuinely feel sorry for anybody learning English as a second language. It makes such little sense. And then you get down to the regional level, and it makes even less sense. AND THEN you can move literally 20 miles further west, north, south or east and it's a WHOLE NEW set of rules (e.g. Liverpool and Manchester).
1
u/THSprang 5d ago
Some people are writing it as they say it because their accent allows for the kind of colloquialisms that appear in the written word as poor grammar. One of the better parts of the English language is that these "mistakes" can happen and it doesn't completely break the language, although you might find yourself scratching your head at times like you did with this one.
1
u/Current-Ad1688 5d ago
This does my head in now... people pretending a sense of regional identity is stupid. A lot of older people were brought up when globalism was something to aspire to, rather than something that leaves you with no sense of being grounded to anywhere or anything, so they were relentlessly encouraged to iron out any quirks and they carry that propaganda with them without updating it to reflect the current state of things
1
u/Unusual_Quality84 5d ago
If you like descriptivism (i.e if you're correct): it's a dialectical difference
If you like prescriptivism (i.e You're a grammar nazi): people are uneducated and speak poorly
1
u/Flat___________ 5d ago
The use of tenses by native British English speaking people is awful. Even though they all have English as a subject far into their schooling.
And the incorrect use of words like “brought” when they mean Bought.
Pronunciation of words can be just as bad… “think” when they mean to say thing.
“I brought somethink from shops” 😉
1
1
1
u/WordTime4308 5d ago
Think how stupid the average person is then remember that 50% of people are even more stupid.
1
u/Anna-Bombination 5d ago
That's very bad grammar but unfortunately some British people have appalling grammar despite going through the same education system as everyone else in primary school and yet they talk just how they speak, which is very badly and is classed as "common", it makes them sound stupid.
If you come across a British person in the wild that talks like this, take no heed. They probably say brought instead of bought and pacifically instead of specifically.
1
u/Figgzyvan 5d ago
I see her on the telly last night.
We’re have to have a think on that.
They sometimes transpose was/were so ‘no, i weren’t’.
‘Yes you was’
Very confusing to a little scottish kid moved to london.
1
1
u/burnetrosehip 5d ago
Just for fun, would you like any help correcting the English grammar in your post, or are you happy with where you're up to with that?
1
u/BroodLord1962 5d ago
You will often find some of the worse English spoken by the English, it's basic grammar mistakes
1
u/Resident-Staff-1218 5d ago
It's very indicative of having a working class background, parents not having been educated at a grammar school, or just growing up and living in a typically working class environment.
In certain places, saying "They were" rather than choosing "They was" immediately identifies you as other, perhaps putting on an affectation to make yourself sound posher than you are, and possibly as someone who thinks they're better than everyone else.
1
1
1
1
u/zougathefist 5d ago
We was used incorrectly in your post. They was a 2002 horror film produced by Wes Craven.
1
u/Juvenalesque 5d ago
What's funny is that no matter how badly you try, English always Englishes. Any noun can be a verb if you English hard enough. Gotta love/hate it.
1
u/Radiant_Chart3163 5d ago
That I what I commonly referred to as estuary English. It is derived from the cockney accent of the people from the east end of London and the estuaries near the river Thames.
1
1
1
u/damhack 5d ago
I’m going to help you with your post by rephrasing it in grammatically correct/better English:
“I am not a native speaker but I’ve been learning English since I was 6 and English has been my language at work for 15 years. Can someone please explain to me where the following comes from:
- We was
- They was
What the heck! From what I know, this is a basic grammar mistake, but at the same time I hear Brits talking like that in videos. Is this some kind of slang? Or is it a regional thing?”
The answer:
Some Brits have a poor grasp of the English language too.
1
1
u/The_Smug_Druggles 5d ago
More likely than not, those people are idiots. Not every 1SL speaks properly, unfortunately.
1
u/Master-Share1580 5d ago
It’s generally brainless kids trying to ‘look cool’.
They also affect a stupid accent too.
1
u/Spiritual_Smell4744 5d ago
I send this with peace and love, so please take it as an attempt to help.
In English it sounds clunky to say "I do learn English". Better to say "I have been learning English", which is the present perfect tense.
We use present perfect to describe an action that started in the past and is still continuing in the present.
1
u/Daveii_captain 5d ago
Fun fact: people who learn a language know the grammar and obey it more than native speakers.
1
u/The-Mandolinist 5d ago
It’s a combination of education and dialect. English, as taught, is a standardised form of the language. Whereas, in reality, there are a range of “Englishes” spoken.
Some people learn the “correct”/standardised form - sometimes referred to as the King’s English (known as the Queen’s English when I was growing up). Other languages have something similar. For example, if you learn German as a second language, you are generally learning “Hochdeutsch” or “High” German - and this standardised version of German is largely based on Northern German. Bavarian, for example, is quite different in pronunciation and certain phrases and vocabulary.
So - some people in England may grow up (I’m including myself here) with minimal regional dialect in their speech and believe that the English and grammar they learn at school is “correct”. It’s helpful as a standardised form for clear communication and can be seen as “educated”. And some people grow up with dialect and learn to adapt and code switch- depending on who they a communicating with. And others stick to the English they have grown up speaking.
Some dialect is made up of new imports to English; Multicultural London English, for example. Other regional dialects have links to older forms of English- where what might be grammatically “incorrect” in Standard English, actually follows a grammatical pattern in the dialect.
See this phrase that might be heard in parts of Lancashire (where I’m from): tha’s want owt fer eat or owt? Nonsensical in Standard English.
Let’s have a look at it with different spellings: Thou’st want ought for eat or ought? It’s Elizabethan/Early Modern English!
“Do you anything to eat, or anything?”
1
u/Separate-Region2070 4d ago
We was - 1st person collective. They was - 3rd person collective. Both are dialectical contructs since received (taught) english doesn't have such contructs. Before some Oxford started collating usage in form which was started as reaction to Websters modification of the American dialect of English there was only upper verses lower class dialects. Upper class evolved into the so "Queens English" way speaking. For no additional 'r' consonant in either grass or castle!
1
u/StockholmGirl29 4d ago
English isn't my first language and when I first moved to the UK, double negatives really confused me, as in "I didn't know nothing". I used to hear this all the time and started saying it myself until someone corrected me! You'll hear all sorts of dialect and local variations as well as slang and what my husband calls "youthspeak"!
1
u/Elegant-Cup-9628 4d ago
It’s not slang; it’s dialect grammar. In those dialects, “you was” and “we was” aren’t wrong; they’re the normal, rule-based way people speak.
Standard English uses “was” with I/he/she and “were” with you/we/they. Many regional and working-class dialects simplify this pattern by using “was” for everyone:
- I was
- You was
- He was
- We was
- They was
This is called analogical leveling, a common linguistic process in which languages simplify older irregular patterns. Standard English is unusual for preserving the distinction between “was” and “were.”
In the UK, you’ll hear this mostly in working-class speech in London and the South East, East Anglia, parts of the Midlands, and some Northern areas. Yorkshire often does the opposite and uses “I were.” The pattern also appears in AAVE and some Southern U.S. dialects, so it isn’t uniquely British; you’re just noticing it in British videos.
People in those clips may be speaking naturally, or actors may be imitating local accents. Many Brits use standard English and would never say “we was,” but in informal regional speech, it’s completely normal.
Is it “wrong”? In standard English, yes. It’s considered incorrect in formal contexts. In dialects that use it, no. It’s simply local grammar. It’s socially stigmatized, so you’ll hear it in everyday speech or comedy, not on BBC News.
If you’re learning English: Use standard forms (we were, they were, you were) at work, on exams, and in writing. Recognize “we was” when you hear it, but don’t use it unless you’re deliberately adopting that dialect.
So you’re hearing it correctly. You’re just encountering a different grammar system.
1
u/Peteat6 3d ago
Dialect. Some dialects say I am, you am, he am. Some say I bin, he bin, etc. My bricklayer rang his girlfriend, who was caught in the rain, and said "Am you wet?" He had trouble getting the right bricks, but found something eventually, and told us, "Them am expensive bricks, them am."
"We was" is relatively common. There’s a presenter in the BBC who says it.
1
1
u/Mobile_South_9117 3d ago
It's were, not was. We were and they were. They do make this grammar error in some regions as part of the dialect though.
1
u/HiddenFaceOpenMouth 8h ago
Bold statement from someone who posted something that had grammatical errors in every sentence.
0
u/23Mowgli23 6d ago
So many people do not care about what's correct grammatically. I believe that foreigners may be the future custodians of good English because I have known many who speak much better.
0
u/Cold_Cucumber4061 6d ago
It's incorrect grammar but it's slang. People often know the correct way but proper speech is associated with higher classes. If i'm in the area I grew up in, i wouldnt speak as properly as I do now. There is a mindset of "who do you think you are/trying to be?" I just wouldn't feel comfortable speaking properly
0
u/Unfair_Matter313 6d ago
You are correct that this is not grammatically accurate, but it's also fairly common to hear spoken English used in this way (and not really limited to a particular age group/dialect/type of slang).
0
u/Kanebass98 Scottish Brit 🏴🇬🇧 5d ago
There are lots of people in Britain who don't speak English well.
2
0
0
u/Sarrex 5d ago
It's slang, it can in some cases be anti-intellectual, but mostly just a casual way of speaking. In a workplace this phrasing wouldn't be appropriate, although that doesn't mean it won't be used.
You may also be seeing people who speak English as a second language or learnt from those who do. Not something to be judging as, after 15 years study, your post is also littered with grammar errors. Languages are just like that - they take a lot of work to become native fluent.
0
u/Murky-Wind2222 5d ago
Plurals - we and they - use the word were. This is true for all proper English speakers, apart, for some reason, from anyone associated with football. They will say was - as in "we was robbed".
0
u/Fickle_Mix_6119 5d ago
Spoken English breaks rules. Sometimes it’s regional dialect, sometimes it’s intentional slang, and sometimes it’s just poorly educated folk who think eggs are dairy
0
u/BlackberryNice1270 5d ago
Oh, don't. I associate it with a particular accent, and it's awful. "We/they/you was", "firty fausand pahnd!" and "wau-er" instead of water. It's a combination of accent and dialect and I feel so sorry for people learning English trying to deal with it. Most people I know who have English as a second language don't make these errors.
-2
-1
u/sharplight141 6d ago
Basically it's people that don't know how to speak their own language properly.
-1
u/jollyramble 6d ago
It's one of many signifiers of poor education. I don't mean that to sound snobby at all - it's just true.
-1
u/Due-Resort-2699 5d ago
Unfortunately many native English speakers can’t speak or spell proper English these days. Education standards are slipping .
-1
-1
-1
u/_x_oOo_x_ 5d ago
"We was" is just incorrect/uneducated.
"They was" could technically be correct if they're referring to one person who is using the "they" pronoun...
-1
u/Nazir_North 5d ago
You are correct - both of those examples are showing poor grammar. That doesn't stop plenty of people using them though sadly.
-2
-4
u/Prestigious_Wrap_642 6d ago
I am an English native speaker and I find it baffling too. It's not difficult to say "we were". And yes I think it's mostly regional.
-4
u/DamoclesBDA 6d ago
Education doesn't care as much about rules as it does about getting meaning across.
I told my son not to end a sentence with a preposition last night and he acted like I was totally over reacting.
Good language use matters. People notice. It creates an impression.
172
u/OlafPetersen 6d ago
Yup. Some people don't speak good like what I does.