‘Sorry' is one word, why are we so bad at apologising?
The Independent
Saying 'sorry' is easy. It's just one word, two syllables. You can say it faster than you can sneeze. Meaning it, however, is a lot harder. According to research commissioned by the language-learning platform Babbel, Britons have 15 uses for the word, with just one of them meaning regret. So seemingly sorry are we all the time that we don't even know what it means any more. Here are some of the ways we're using 'sorry' incorrectly: to ask someone to move out of the way. To ask someone to repeat themselves. To show empathy. To express disbelief. To disagree. To mock. And, if we're British, to preface literally any sentence ever.
'In British English, 'sorry' has evolved beyond its original role as an expression of remorse,' explains Noël Wolf, cultural and linguistic expert at Babbel, whose research also found that we use the word 'sorry' an average of nine times a day. 'It now serves as a social lubricant and a flexible tool of communication used in all sorts of everyday interactions.' It also reflects our nationwide desire to avoid conflict by way of old-fashioned, sturdy politeness. We keep calm and carry on, as is the British way. 'In a culture where directness can feel impolite, and personal space, both emotional and physical, is protected, 'sorry' can smooth over moments of friction, no matter how minor,' says Wolf.
The problem with such an overuse of the word is that it has become diluted beyond recognition, and now we're unsure how to apologise properly for something that actually warrants remorse. How can any of us truly be sorry if we don't know how to say it? If we're saying it too much, does the word even mean anything any more? And why do so many of us resort to insipid platitudes when apologising? Few sentences are more grating to hear than 'Sorry if I upset you...'
These are some of the questions asked by Marjorie Ingall and Susan McCarthy in their book Getting to Sorry: The Art of Apology at Work and at Home, which examines the reasons why we might be wired to apologise badly, in both our professional and our personal lives, and why it's holding us back from having meaningful relationships with others – and with ourselves. A central tenet of their argument relates to the rise of celebrity apologies: public statements made via social media, or representatives, that are designed to enshrine the celebrity's reputation by minimising bad behaviour. Or occasionally denying it altogether.
We've seen this play out countless times in the public eye, with everyone from Drew Barrymore and Lena Dunham to Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis issuing statements to address allegations against them. Not to mention Britain's endless list of terribly sorry politicians. Often, the apologies are long-winded, PR-executed masterpieces. Occasionally, they're laughably weak and serve as the jumping-off point for an entirely new genre of meme; there are, in fact, several lists compiling the 'worst celebrity apologies'.
'They tend to centre the person apologising rather than the people receiving the apology,' says Ingall. 'Rarely do they say exactly what they're apologising for, making them sound fake and like clear attempts to squirm out of trouble rather than a legitimate attempt to make amends.' The result, Ingall posits, is that they set a precedent for apologising badly; for finding every excuse possible to shift the blame and avoid taking accountability, in a bid to protect our reputation – as if we, too, have a globally recognised public image to consider.
'This is because our brains are designed to protect us, to help us see ourselves as the hero of our own story,' explains Ingall. 'If we didn't think we were decent people, it would be hard to get through the day. This means that when we're faced with the cognitive dissonance of 'I'm a good person but I did a bad thing', we tend to fix that uncomfortable dissonance by telling ourselves what we did wasn't really that awful, that we don't really have to apologise, and that the other person always overreacts.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Today
a day ago
- Gulf Today
‘Sorry' is one word, why are we so bad at apologising?
Olivia Petter, The Independent Saying 'sorry' is easy. It's just one word, two syllables. You can say it faster than you can sneeze. Meaning it, however, is a lot harder. According to research commissioned by the language-learning platform Babbel, Britons have 15 uses for the word, with just one of them meaning regret. So seemingly sorry are we all the time that we don't even know what it means any more. Here are some of the ways we're using 'sorry' incorrectly: to ask someone to move out of the way. To ask someone to repeat themselves. To show empathy. To express disbelief. To disagree. To mock. And, if we're British, to preface literally any sentence ever. 'In British English, 'sorry' has evolved beyond its original role as an expression of remorse,' explains Noël Wolf, cultural and linguistic expert at Babbel, whose research also found that we use the word 'sorry' an average of nine times a day. 'It now serves as a social lubricant and a flexible tool of communication used in all sorts of everyday interactions.' It also reflects our nationwide desire to avoid conflict by way of old-fashioned, sturdy politeness. We keep calm and carry on, as is the British way. 'In a culture where directness can feel impolite, and personal space, both emotional and physical, is protected, 'sorry' can smooth over moments of friction, no matter how minor,' says Wolf. The problem with such an overuse of the word is that it has become diluted beyond recognition, and now we're unsure how to apologise properly for something that actually warrants remorse. How can any of us truly be sorry if we don't know how to say it? If we're saying it too much, does the word even mean anything any more? And why do so many of us resort to insipid platitudes when apologising? Few sentences are more grating to hear than 'Sorry if I upset you...' These are some of the questions asked by Marjorie Ingall and Susan McCarthy in their book Getting to Sorry: The Art of Apology at Work and at Home, which examines the reasons why we might be wired to apologise badly, in both our professional and our personal lives, and why it's holding us back from having meaningful relationships with others – and with ourselves. A central tenet of their argument relates to the rise of celebrity apologies: public statements made via social media, or representatives, that are designed to enshrine the celebrity's reputation by minimising bad behaviour. Or occasionally denying it altogether. We've seen this play out countless times in the public eye, with everyone from Drew Barrymore and Lena Dunham to Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis issuing statements to address allegations against them. Not to mention Britain's endless list of terribly sorry politicians. Often, the apologies are long-winded, PR-executed masterpieces. Occasionally, they're laughably weak and serve as the jumping-off point for an entirely new genre of meme; there are, in fact, several lists compiling the 'worst celebrity apologies'. 'They tend to centre the person apologising rather than the people receiving the apology,' says Ingall. 'Rarely do they say exactly what they're apologising for, making them sound fake and like clear attempts to squirm out of trouble rather than a legitimate attempt to make amends.' The result, Ingall posits, is that they set a precedent for apologising badly; for finding every excuse possible to shift the blame and avoid taking accountability, in a bid to protect our reputation – as if we, too, have a globally recognised public image to consider. 'This is because our brains are designed to protect us, to help us see ourselves as the hero of our own story,' explains Ingall. 'If we didn't think we were decent people, it would be hard to get through the day. This means that when we're faced with the cognitive dissonance of 'I'm a good person but I did a bad thing', we tend to fix that uncomfortable dissonance by telling ourselves what we did wasn't really that awful, that we don't really have to apologise, and that the other person always overreacts.'
Gulf Today
5 days ago
- Gulf Today
Families received wrong remains of Air India crash victims: Lawyer
Relatives of a British victim killed in last month's Air India crash received a casket that contained mixed remains, a lawyer representing several families and UK media said on Wednesday. The family of a separate victim received the remains of another person, according to James Healy-Pratt, who is representing 20 British families who lost loved ones in the disaster. A total of 241 people on board the London-bound Boeing 787 Dreamliner died when the plane crashed shortly after take-off from Ahmedabad in western India on June 12. Some 169 Indian passengers and 52 British nationals were killed, making it one of the deadliest plane crashes in terms of the number of British fatalities. Several people on the ground also died while only one passenger, British citizen Vishwash Kumar Ramesh, survived the crash. Firefighters carry a victim's body after the Air India flight 171 crashed in a residential area. File / AFP Healy-Pratt told the Press Association news agency that the return of victims' remains had been marred by serious errors, which had been identified following a probe by a British coroner. "In the first two caskets that were repatriated, in one of the caskets, there was co-mingling of DNA which did not relate to the deceased in that casket or the casket that accompanied it," he said. The lawyer added the coroner was then "able to determine that one particular loved one was not at all who the family thought they were." Miten Patel, whose mother Shobhana Patel died along with her husband in the disaster, told the BBC that "other remains" were found in her casket after her body was returned to Britain. Health workers shift the body of a victim, who died in the plane crash, to a cold storage at a hospital, in the aftermath of an Air India Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner crash during take-off from an airport, in Ahmedabad, India, June 13, 2025. REUTERS/Adnan Abidi "People were tired and there was a lot of pressure. But there has to be a level of responsibility that you're sending the right bodies to the UK," he told the broadcaster. The Daily Mail newspaper first reported two cases in which the wrong remains were apparently returned to families in Britain. India's foreign ministry said all remains "were handled with utmost professionalism and with due regard for the dignity of the deceased." "We are continuing to work with the UK authorities on addressing any concerns related to this issue," the statement added. Agence France-Presse
Sharjah 24
17-07-2025
- Sharjah 24
Sharjah's "Salamatk" Bus: Empowering Schools and Staff
Benefiting 965 Trainees 22 British-curriculum schools were reached, benefiting 965 trainees, including guards and support staff, who received practical training on safety concepts and procedures in the school environment. In the second quarter, the visits targeted schools that follow foreign curricula. 14 field visits were conducted, benefiting 444 trainees from the same categories. This is part of a phased plan aimed at covering all schools in the Emirate. Enhancing Safety in School Environment SPSA emphasised that raising awareness among support staff is one of the most important elements in enhancing safety in the school environment, making reaching these groups a priority to ensure their readiness and ability to act appropriately in emergency situations. The "Salamatk Bus" is an effective means of directly and practically transferring this knowledge.
