I was constantly getting triggered. / I constantly got triggered.

[Marika33]

I found this comment on youtube written by some Tom Fuller, I suppose he's a native English speaker.
Could you please tell me if it's correct to say "I constantly got triggered" instead?

I used to be woke. I was constantly getting triggered. I protested everything that offended me, and demanded it all be cancelled. Finally I grew out of it, and went to preschool.

 

[emsr2d2]

I found this comment on YouTube, written by someone called Tom Fuller. I suppose assume he's a native English speaker.
Could you please tell me if it's correct to say "I constantly got triggered" instead?

I used to be woke. I was constantly getting triggered. I protested everything that offended me, and demanded it all be cancelled. Finally I grew out of it, and went to preschool.

It's not wrong but the use of continuous adds to the ongoing nature, along with "constantly".

 

[jutfrank]

Could you please tell me if it's correct to say "I constantly got triggered" instead?

The answer to that question is yes, but it's not a very productive question. Here's a far better one:

Could you please tell me why the speaker chose to use the past continuous tense in this context?

The answer is that we use the past continuous to talk about characteristic past behaviour. As emsr2d2 has pointed out, this particular use of the past continuous is typically used with a small set of adverb modifiers, 'always' and 'constantly' being the two obvious ones.

Ask less whether things are correct and instead start exploring what led a speaker to select a certain tense/aspect, and what effect it had.

 

[Skrej]

Note too, that the comment is supposed to be a humorous gibe. He's comparing people who get easily triggered and offended to young children throwing tantrums.

It seems like a straightforward confession until the last three words. Only then do we realize the rest was a setup and lead-in to a quip.

 

[Tarheel]

I had the same experience.

 

[Marika33]

The answer to that question is yes, but it's not a very productive question. Here's a far better one:

Could you please tell me why the speaker chose to use the past continuous tense in this context?

Maybe it's a far better one, but, unfortunately, it's not what I wanted to know.

I used to have my reasons for using the past continuous, but it turns out that my reasons aren't reasons at all. Moreover, it turns out that there are some reasons (for using the past continuous) that I wouldn't have even thought of, which turn out to be real reasons.

 

[jutfrank]

I don't follow what you're saying. Can you say it again?

 

[emsr2d2]

Can you say it again?

Preferably using different words!

 

[Tarheel]

This comes up often. Native speakers tend to understand the language implicitly. They choose the words they use -- especially in casual conversation -- without thinking about it much if at all. That's fine. There's nothing wrong with that. But they often lack explicit knowledge. That's why they might have trouble explaining why they used a certain word or words. If you ask them to explain why they used a certain word or words they have to think about it more than they did before they used it or them.

 

[Marika33]

I don't follow what you're saying. Can you say it again?

I'm surprised to find out that the reasons for using the past continuous are not at all what I used to think!

 

[jutfrank]

I'm surprised to find out that the reasons for using the past continuous are not at all what I used to think!

Right, and that's my point in post #3. You need to consider what those reasons are.