must have, should have, could have, would have - aaaaargh

Makunouchi said:
Hopefully dmpoole will come back and clarify the situation.
Click to expand...

It's the replacement of 'of' for 'have' and I don't remember seeing it on these forums but over the last year on here it's got worse (mainly by young posters).
It seems I can't go in a thread without seeing somebody do it, I look at the posters name and think 'I thought they'd know better'.
Like I said earlier, I was reading that people hear the spoken word like 'must've' and translate that to 'must have'.
The problem is they must have used it at school and not been corrected because I don't believe somebody has made the conscious decision to replace the words on purpose.
So basically they misinterprete the spoken word, write it down but teacher doesn't correct and it's proper grammar to them.
 
dmpoole said:
.....The problem is they must have used it at school and not been corrected because I don't believe somebody has made the conscious decision to replace the words on purpose.
So basically they misinterprete the spoken word, write it down but teacher doesn't correct and it's proper grammar to them.
Click to expand...
I have a 3 year old daughter; surely this isn't standard practise in schools these days otherwise I am seriously worried about her education?!

A poster further up suggested that teachers aren't allowed to correct too many of a student's spelling and grammer errors - surely this is ridiculous? How is someone supposed to learn if they aren't tought?

Spelling, grammar and written clarity are absolutely essential for many jobs, even more since the advent of email. If you write a business email using 'of' instead of 'have' you have immediately presented yourself in a negative fashion to pretty much any reader.
 
dmpoole said:
I've had a drink so I'm going to tell you just how much this annoys me.

I would have done it
I must have seen it
I could have had one of those
I should have had English lessons

When did it all go wrong?
Click to expand...

Regrets ey?

What's done is done, you cannot mend it with regret so don't try.

I regret saying the above without reading the thread..

Anyway I'll think you'll find the correct way is "wooooda coooda shoooda"
 
Loving all the spelling errors from the indignant posters in here ;) Fella a couple of posts up - it's 'ridiculous'.

Anyway.

The replacement of have with of is not evolution of language, it's stupid laziness. 'Have' and 'of' both have defined meanings and uses in English, and it doesn't make sense to conflate them. You couldn't consistently use of in place of have as it would become too confusing.

With regard to the chap talking about French students learning to spell based on how words sounds - that's a perfectly valid idea, but unfortunately our language is so inconsistent that it doesn't work. However, in Dutch or Finnish, the concept of spelling or pronunciation is something of a nonsense as the rules are consistently applied so if you can spell a word then you can say it, and if you can spe it you can say it.

Anyway. I of said all that I of to say about this. Of fun, guys.
 
What about if they're torte?

Kirsch-Sahne-Torte-103.jpg
 
Berserker said:
The advertising/marketing types must be loving this - how long before 'simples' ends up in the OED? :)

Yes, I'm just as guilty!
Click to expand...

Much as the use of "simples" irks me, it does highlight the power of good marketing or branding. It's kinda like the way any vacuum cleaner is a Hoover, and back in the day any pocket sized cassette player was a Walkman.
 
jumpy said:
Vernacular and colloquialism are all well and good with spoken english. But the beauty of english (to me at least) is its expressiveness and ability to be clear, concise and descriptive, and imaginative.

If you carry over 'slang' into the written word you loose all sense of context and meaning. It is not evolution, but degeneration. Nothing is added as a benefit to the whole of the language in general terms, but much is lost or taken away through ignorance or plain laziness. :eek:

Evolution of language, such as the online verbiage as we see here every day, would be such things as 'lol' or 'omg' 'wtf' - less a way of talking and more a means of relaying more complex information and common phrasing without the need to write it out long hand... it's called an acronym. But these are subjective to common (regular) users of the internet and not incorporated into the language at large. Informal speech and writing.

Dissolution of language to the extent that meaning, and therefore understanding, is lost is not a good thing - replacing descriptive words with those simpler and less versatile, because of slack teaching, is part of the reason why we now have a good proportion of our youth who have no grasp of communication above the most basic, vulgar, grunting.

I have a reasonable grasp of spoken and written english, and while I find it slightly annoying when grammar and comprehension are ignored on forums etc (more for the fact that I have to then guess at the meaning, than any real hatred), what is most unfortunate is having to say something again in a simpler, more pedestrian way, when the person I am speaking to does not understand due to their lack of education. Depending on the individual I either get a blank look, or they seem to think I am taking the ****; the suspicion being that "usin' big letters innit" is deliberate to obfuscate their understanding. It is not. It's just the way I was taught at school and by my parents.
Sadly, the lowest common denominator appears to be the standard of teaching these days.
I am guilty of assuming that a lack of correct language (written or spoken), sometimes implies a lack of intelligence or education, often both, when applied to some younger people. :o How you speak and write can be deemed illustrative of how you think.
Click to expand...

tl;dr
 
Milkybk said:
It's not sarcastic if you don't say anything else! Common sense must have escaped you. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

How could it have been construed as anything but sarcastic when I quoted a post from the middle of the thread talking about unacceptable ways to write/speak at forums (instead of quoting the original post which could have indicated the possibility of an sincere tl;dr comment)? It obviously shows I bothered to read until then and then decided to quote/comment.

You missed the sarcasm, accept it! Otherwise I'll have no option but to call your honour to a duel and let fate decide the righteous one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom