Please check invitation wording and help with disagreement

Re: Please check invitation wording and help with disagreement

• CMGragain member

  

  January 2016 edited January 2016

  Your version is the most correct one, but theirs gives the essential information clearly enough.  Do they give you any reason WHY they want this wording?
  Five thirty is NOT in the evening.  Evening begins at six o'clock.
  Why are the groom's parents on he invitation?
  The "Dinner and dancing immediately following" is rather off putting.  It sounds so pretentious.  What if the guests don't feel like dancing?
  

  

  Report0 Reply
• canadianteacher member

  

  January 2016

  Wouldn't it be "half past five o'clock" rather than "half after?"
  Other than that, I think your wording sounds more correct.  Definitely not worth getting into a battle over, but maybe you can come to a compromise?  Add in your last name, but don't change the time or reception wording.

  

  Report0 Reply
• CMGragain member

  

  January 2016

  canadianteacher said:

  Wouldn't it be "half past five o'clock" rather than "half after?"
  Other than that, I think your wording sounds more correct.  Definitely not worth getting into a battle over, but maybe you can come to a compromise?  Add in your last name, but don't change the time or reception wording.

  Not for wedding invitations.  The words "half after" are considered to be correct.
  

  

  Report0 Reply
• canadianteacher member

  

  January 2016

  CMGragain said:

  canadianteacher said:

  Wouldn't it be "half past five o'clock" rather than "half after?"
  Other than that, I think your wording sounds more correct.  Definitely not worth getting into a battle over, but maybe you can come to a compromise?  Add in your last name, but don't change the time or reception wording.

  Not for wedding invitations.  The words "half after" are considered to be correct.
  

  Interesting, I didn't know! Thanks.

  

  Report0 Reply
• PeachyKeenMOB member

  

  January 2016

  Thank you both. Why they like this wording is beyond me. I don't want to be a Momzilla about this because I put my foot down on some other etiquette faux pas. I think he wants his parents on there and she doesn't care. It doesn't bother me, even though I know (after lurking) it's not really an "honor" and the invitations should list the hosts. I agree about a compromise. I think if I can get her last name off of her name line (we have the same last name, and visually it bothers me) and keep the others, I'll feel better. Also, thank you. I didn't even catch evening vs. afternoon. I'll talk to her about changing that. And yes, not everyone may want to dance! Ha ha!

  Report0 Reply
• CMGragain member

  

  January 2016 edited January 2016

  Well, as long as they aren't having a cash bar, a honeymoon registry, or a tiered reception, it will probably be OK.  Just smile and be the gracious MOB.
  

  

  Report1 Reply
• PeachyKeenMOB member

  

  January 2016

  CMGragain said:

  Well, as long as they aren't having a cash bar, a honeymoon registry, or a tiered reception, it will probably be OK.  Just smile and be the gracious MOB.
  

  Definitely not! I've learned a lot about wedding etiquette from you wonderful posters! I'm also making sure that wedding party members are seated with their dates, no gap, significant others are invited (by name) and no registry info or dress requirement is included in the invitations. 

  Report6 Reply
• MairePoppy mod

  

  January 2016 edited January 2016

  I'd let it go, @PeachyKeenMOB. 
  
  I know your version is the correct traditional version of an American wedding invitation, but please humor me for a moment. I hope CMGragain won't make me stand in the corner for the remainder of the evening.
  
  1. Your daughter may want her full name on the invitation because his full name is on there. Yes, I know traditionally the groom's full name is included because his parent's names aren't included, but you've changed the format. 
  
  2. Five-thirty in the evening would bother me more than the name thing because 5:30 is not evening and it's highly unlikely that the wedding will be at fiver-thirty a.m. although there was this one bride who wanted to get married at sunrise so...
  
  3.The dinner and dancing line doesn't bother me, although it's unnecessary. I have seen many invitations with this brief description of the reception.
  
  4. There is no reason for the year to be on the invitation. It's automatically assumed that the wedding will take place on the twenty-fifth of June 2016 and not two thousand seventeen or eighteen, unless you're sending those invitations out years in advance. I knew a bride, a long time ago, who used 'In the year of our Lord, nineteen thousand seventy.' She liked the way it sounded. YIKES!
  
  Now, in consideration of the above, it was explained to me that the year is included for the sake of posterity. The invitation becomes a family document, like a baptismal record, so why not include the names of the POG on the invitation in 'the son of'  line? Or that the wedding was celebrated with dinner and dancing? 
  
  
  
  

                     

  Report1 Reply
• CMGragain member

  

  January 2016

  As I have often posted, the invitation needs to clearly tell the guest who, what, when and where.  This invitation does that, though it is not traditionally worded.
  

  

  Report1 Reply
• PeachyKeenMOB member

  

  January 2016

  Thank you all so much! I appreciate your input.

  Report0 Reply