What is the difference between "she got shot on the hand" and "she was shot on the hand"?

Question

I want to know if it's correct to say

"she got shot on the hand"

Secondly, I want to know what the is difference between:

"she got shot on the hand"

and

"she was shot on the hand".

Answer 1

Although it is correct to say “got shot”, English teachers might scoff. The more formal or “correct” way would be “she was shot”

Answer 2

First, you really do need to change the preposition to in.

She got shot in the hand.

or

She was shot in the hand.

As far as the difference goes, it is going to vary somewhat by region, but there are some consistant usage preferences as well. Shoe's answer to this question contains the following regards to what licences get passives.

There is a long discussion in the Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (p1441-1443) of the typical contexts in which the get-passive is more likely than the be-passive. The CGEL notes that:

i Get-passives tend to be avoided in formal style,

ii Get-passives are found only with dynamic verbs,

iii Get-passives are more conducive to an agentive interpretation of the subject,

iv Get-passives are characteristically used in clauses involving adversity or benefit.

The key here is item iii. Because got invites the idea that the victim's actions may have exacerbated the incident (see John Lawler's comment below Kris's answer in the above link), was would tend to convey a more empathetic feeling on the part of the speaker. Got would likely sound unsympathetic or a bit callous.

Answer 3

Both sentences are in the passive voice, and don't mention the agent.

Active voice:

"[agent] shot her on the hand"

To form the passive voice we use the verbs either "to be" or "to get" in an auxiliary role:

Rather than conjugating directly for voice, English uses the past participle form of the verb plus an auxiliary verb, either be or get (called linking verbs in traditional grammar), to indicate passive voice.

The money was donated to the school.
The vase got broken during the fight.
All men are created equal.

There are cases when you can use either auxiliary verb. In other cases you can only use "be". Knowing when and why to use one or the other is complicated. An example:

The door was closed. (correct)
The door got closed. (unidiomatic, sounds strange)

Also, mentioning the agent of the verb often has the effect of making "get" auxiliary sound acceptable:

The door got closed by the wind. (Sounds a lot better)

also:

The shop got closed. (sounds acceptable to me)
The shop got closed down. (definitely sounds acceptable to me)

For a better explanation of "get" and "be" auxiliary verbs to create the passive voice, see this answer, which references the Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. The rules seem general, not definitive.

In your particular case both "got" or "was" are acceptable, and I don't see any particular difference in meaning other than to say that "get" to me generally sounds less formal. My feeling about the formality is supported by the quote from the CGEL grammar in the answer I linked. If you look at that answer it's quite a complicated subject as to when and why "get" auxiliary should be used instead "be".