I often see sentences begin with "That said"

[Suzy]

Hello Sir Torsten Daerr and Miss Sue D..
Good morning..Nice to know both of you..
Before i started to asking you the question,Let me tell both of you about myself.. :D

My name is Suzy Aries.My nick name is Chi..
Actually,I'm from Malaysian.I'm 18 years old and still study(pre-university).For the next year,I will be sitting for Malaysian University English Test(Muet).I'm quite afraid to face that exams.This is because i'm not confident with myself in listening,speaking,reading and writting.I hope i will scored much better than my SPM last year.This is my 'goals' that i want to achieved and i hope u will teach me of how to improved English.Please Sir..Help me and pity on me the poor..I really want to improved my English..

Sir,

May i ask you something?
What is the differences between English and Inggeris?

[Barb_D]

I don't find either of 2s to be natural at all.

They were popular. *That said, they made a lot of money? That doesn't work. You could say, "Given that, it's not surprising they made a lot of money."
*We're in the rainy season. That said, it's been raining. That doesn't work either.

I've never used "That said" to mean "Therefore, it's not surprising that..."

Perhaps others have, but I would always use it to bring up an argument or point or fact that seems contrary to what was just said.

[Timtak]

Barb_D wrote

[Blissful]

I came across the above thread as it was quoted in another forum and now wish to set the record straight as regards the usage of "that said".

"That said" is incorrect use of English which became fashionable in the 1980s. No good writer prior to then ever wrote the term "that said" intentionally. "That being said" is the correct and only proper construction to use when a sentence has an inactive structure and the writer wishes to reaffirm a point made previously, so as to deviate from same. Such is used much like "however" or "nonetheless".

Those who wish to master English should know that "That said" is a nonsense, in formal English, when written without the necessary "...being..."

Furthermore, some persons above have suggested that "that said" is used where one wishes to say "having said that..." Such persons are not entirely correct: "that being said", they fail to mention, must only used when the sentence has a passive structure; that is, whenever there is no active speaker or narrator in the sentence in which it is used. When a given sentence is actively constructed (i.e., has a speaker) then "that being said" should never be used, instead the sentence should start as follows: "Having said that..."

Here are some examples: "I'm quite hungry. Having said that, I couldn't eat fish" - Correct

"I'm quite hungry. That being said, I couldn't eat fish" - Incorrect

"The weather will soon turn cooler. Having said that, the weather will not stay cool for long" Incorrect - as the weather cannot talk!

"The weather will soon turn cooler. That being said, the weather will not stay cool for long." Correct, as the sentence is inactive in its construction and has no particular speaker in it, so "that being said (again never simply "that said...") is correctly used.

[Alan]

Hi Blissful,

You seem quite passionate about the use of the expression 'that said'. I don't share your feelings about it. I can't see why you dismiss it as 'incorrect'. It seems possible to interpret it as both 'having said that' and 'that having been said' assuming that in the first use the subject following has done the 'saying' and in the second instance it is regarded as an unrelated aside.

Alan
_________________
English as a Second Language
You can read my ESL story Present Simple

[Blissful]

Thank you for your comments, Alan. Firstly, it's not that I "dismiss it as incorrect", for I am by no means whatsoever responsible for constructing the rules on formal English. Anyone who is not exactly turned on by grammar please look away shortly (& please re-read what I wrote above so that you will at least know how the rules are applied in formal English).

The rule I referred to is known as that concerning active and inactive past participle constructions. For example, "having said" is a participle construction. That is simply grammatical fact, & with no disrespect, whether you agree with me or not!

What I wrote accorded perfectly with formal rules of grammar without my stating same explicitly. I am merely, in other words, restating how certain formal rules of written English are correctly applied. Rather than risk boring many persons with the formalities of language I simply stated how the rules as to "that said..." etc. constructions are applied. So when you say you don't share feelings with what I wrote, please consider if you are in fact disagreeing with the rules of English which are all that I've used in presenting my examples? It is not, that is to say, *just* my personal opinion that "that being said..." is correct and "that said..." is incorrect".

Thus, for example, when I criticised the inactive usage of "having said that" I am of course referring to there being an active past participle construction in all such sentences where such is used. "Having said..." is a participle construction that must obey the rules of such constructions. Again that is fact. If anyone begins a sentence with "Having said..." then the person who has spoken must be cited in that sentence. That is a rule of formal English, and not simply my opinion. Persons should know what is acceptable in formal English as well as informal English

The failure to attach the participle 'being' to an appropriate noun or pronoun often produces unnecessary absurdities which I won't expand upon further here. Anyway, I just wanted to assure you, that, as far as grammar is concerned, I most certainly know what I am talking about.

[Timtak]

Thank you Blissful for confirming that "That said"/"That being said" means something similar to "however" (the main issue on this thread, I think) and for clarifying that it is used in inactive sentences.

With regard to the assertion that "That said" is a nonsense in formal English, I beg to disagree.

I think that language, even "formal" language evolves.

For example, I presume "nonetheless" evolved from "none the less." At some point in the evolution of "nonetheless", in the distant past, it would have been correct to claim that "nonetheless is a nonsense in formal English." At what point did "nonetheless" become correct even in formal English?

Personally, I think that "That said" is used so widely now that I consider it correct even "formally". At least, the phrase is used in newspaper articles for instance. Do the folks at Reuters write "formal English"? Or do they write mere journalese?
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=p&tbs=nws%3A1&q=%22that+said%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=