English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
Well, a letter that I wrote to a school included a sentence like this:
I got accepted with a full scholarship...
Then, a friend of mine from America changed it to:
I was accepted with a full scholarship...
First of all, was the change necessary? If so, why?
Thank you in advance!
It depends on to whom you're sending the letter. It wasn't necessary, but it was an improvement. "Got accepted" is a commonly used phrase and will be understood, but "was accepted" is better grammar.
Got is the past tense of the verb to get, which has multiple connotations - "to obtain [as in 'to get a degree']," "to reach a destination [as in 'to get there']," and "to become, or show a change of state [the connotation you're indicating above]."
While get can be used in passive construction - but isn't necessarily so, was can only be a passive construction - as the past tense of to be. The verb to be is a squirrelly one as it is, but at least it only indicates a state of being.
Hope this is clearer than mud!
To use "got" in that sentence, you would have to write something like
I got an acceptance letter...
in other words, you obtained something. But your sentence referred to an action by the school of which you were the recipient. Thus, your state of being was changed, and the "to be" verb is more correct:
You were accepted.
While "got" can indicate a change of state as well, as in: I got hot waiting in the sun, I think it is used more for change over time: The more I listened, the angrier I got. If I say: I was hot waiting in the sun, the sense of occurring over time is removed.
Despite your original formulation being very common and likely would have been unremarked, your American friend was correct. In any case, "was" sounds more polished.
