for the love of god, it's "Would have" not "would of"

[scorpionldr]

I swear, the internet is going to drive me to drink. What the hell do they teach in schools now?

ok, tell me this. "would have" can be put together into "would've". "what of" sounds a hell of a lot like "would've". what is the problem?? They both imply the same thing.

 

[TMF Jeff]

ok, tell me this. "would have" can be put together into "would've". "what of" sounds a hell of a lot like "would've". what is the problem?? They both imply the same thing.

The problem is grammar. "Have" is a verb, so saying "would have" means/implies something. "Of" is a preposition, so saying "would of" means/implies... survey says: exactly nothing!

 

[Oblesklk]

It's just language evolving, as it has over thousands of years. The problems with teaching proper rules is that they're viewed like a snapshot, an immovable sets of laws to follow. Impossible. The language is simply becoming more efficient, even if it sounds improper, rude, illiterate, and ill-informed.

Just imagine the reaction of the first English person seeing "They're" for the first time, instead of the beloved "They are." Or the first Frenchman to hear c'est instead of ce est, etc, etc.

I don't use netspeak myself. But I do appreciate it, for what it is. Then again, I've always loved languages, so I'm somewhat biased. And I've always been a fan of substance over form, as a general rule.

🙂

 

[TMF Jeff]

And I've always been a fan of substance over form, as a general rule.

🙂

What exactly is it that you're saying about me when you say this?

 

[Dussicar]

It's about time somebody brought this subject up. I was beginning to fear that I was the only one who had a problem with it.

Now, I am not a spelling or punctuation god by any means. But when you look at some shit people post and how they post it just to save time or even because the system failed them miserably in the remedial catagory, it really makes me lose my faith in the future of humanity...That and the home shopping network.


but my bigest problem is wen peepl post lik tis.

 

[goddess_nemesis]

y'know one of the things no one has mentioned yet is the word ain't. i can't tell you how many English teachers will say it's not a word. okay if ain't isn't a word then why is it in the dictionary?

half the time, i say ain't just to annoy my English teacher. and i'm an English major.

i think you also have to take into consideration the person's accent. accents really affect (or is it effect? 😕 ) how some people say words.

don't blame all of it on teachers. my English teacher in high school was the teacher from HELL when it came to grammar and spelling. but some students just don't care.

 

[lk70]

"Libary" instead of "Library"
"axe" instead of "ask"

Ok I have a question. Maybe belongs in its own thread, but I don't expect it to take off really so I'm gonna leave it here. Someone close to me says "libary." I have no idea why. He's smart, spells it right when he writes it...why does he say libary? It bugs me. So the question is...do I say something? Isn't that being just a tad officious? Does it matter if he says "libary" if he's a good guy?

 

[drew70]

Ok I have a question. Maybe belongs in its own thread, but I don't expect it to take off really so I'm gonna leave it here. Someone close to me says "libary." I have no idea why. He's smart, spells it right when he writes it...why does he say libary? It bugs me. So the question is...do I say something? Isn't that being just a tad officious? Does it matter if he says "libary" if he's a good guy?

You could correct him in an off-hand less officious manner, maybe by posing it as a question. "Is the R in library pronounced? Or is it silent?" After a brief discussion you could say, "You know, I think it IS pronounced, come to think of it." A little sneaky, perhaps, but the goal is to spare his feelings.

 

[scorpionldr]

The problem is grammar. "Have" is a verb, so saying "would have" means/implies something. "Of" is a preposition, so saying "would of" means/implies... survey says: exactly nothing!

However "have" is also a past tense word. can't look from just one point

 

[tickledorange]

OMFG this thread ROX0R!!!! Ur sooooo rite tho,,, english iz falling apart!

"It's Missour-ee, not Missour-ah! If you're going to say Missour-ah, go back to Illi-noise!"

I would of posted earlier, but I wasn't on. 😉

 

[Redmage]

However "have" is also a past tense word. can't look from just one point

If it's considered all by itself then "have" can mean a lot of things. However we're talking here about its use as what's called a "verbal auxilliary" in English: a word that combines with a verb in a specific way, in this case to change the tense. Putting "have" in front of a verb creates the past perfect tense, as in "I have written this reply." The verbal auxilliary "would have" creates the conditional past perfect, as in "I would have agreed with you, if you had been correct."

Both of these are formal constructions in English, not just casual usages in which "have" can be replaced by any word that sounds more or less like it.

 

[storyteller]

...accents really affect (or is it effect? 😕 )...

The following is taken from p. 106 of Edith Schwager's Medical English Usage and Abusage (Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press, 1991).

AFFECT, EFFECT

These words can be either nouns or verbs, and that's what causes the difficulty...

Affect as a noun is stressed on the first syllable. It has to do with emotion or range of emotions and is rarely used except in psychology and psychiatry.

Affect as a verb (accented on the second syllable) means to have an influence or effect on something. Effect...as a verb means to execute or accomplish.

If a mnemonic association is needed, the following verb forms, although not synonymous, may help:
To affect is to alter or act on.
To effect is to execute.
To be effective is to be efficient...

For the nouns, try these mnemonic aids:
Flat affect
End effect​

Hope this helps with using these two correctly. I often wonder whether I've used them correctly as well. Writing the above has been a good reminder of when which is correct.

When I flipped open this book it fell to a page where I had highlighted the following quote (p. xi):

"The difference between the right word and the nearly right word is the same as that between lightning and the lightning bug."--Mark Twain​

Following his lead, I'll take the opportunity to attempt to influence--affect--or preferably correct, the misuse of comprise and myriad.

Again, Ms. Schwager put it well in describing the difference between comprise and compose (p. 110): "...the parts compose the whole; the whole comprises the parts." Examples: The house comprises seven rooms. The house is composed of seven rooms. Seven rooms compose the house. That is, comprised of is WRONG.

Likewise, myriad by definition is a noun that represents a very great or indefinitely great number of persons or things. That means, that of is already included in the definition of myriad, so to say myriad of is not only WRONG but repetitive. Example of INCORRECT usage: "She had a myriad of complaints." CORRECT usage: "She had myriad complaints."

Some of my pet peeves. Until adults, especially those in the media and politics, use these words correctly, the children won't.

 

[Seria]

Wow.

Thank you, Oblesklk for bringing some realism to this thread. Okay, I know I'm new and I'll probably get flamed for this, but:

If your biggest problem or issue in life is the poor grammar or slang that other people choose to use during their recreational activities, then your not paying attention to what is going on in the world right now. Let's have a little perspective, shall we?

 

[TMF Jeff]

So we're only allowed to bring up our biggest issues? Is your biggest issue the fact that we're bringing this up?

 

[Seria]

So we're only allowed to bring up our biggest issues? Is your biggest issue the fact that we're bringing this up?

No, I guess I just don't understand why this is such an issue for some people. I mean, the way I talk to people when I'm chatting online is obviously not the same way I talk to my boss at work. They're two different aspects of my life, I act professional at work, but when I'm online that's personal time and it doesn't really bother me if I use slang or shortcuts or if the person I'm chatting with uses them. I'm more interested in what they have to say, not how they say it.
Anyway, maybe I'm wrong. Just my opinion. And I'm sorry if the tone of my previous post seemed confrontational, it's been a long day,lol.

 

[Nedstacey2]

English professor and credentialed grammar and language expert weighing in here:

Awesome thread! It's great to see that so many of you care so much about these issues which I've spent my whole career on (ending a sentence with preposition there, of course). The saddest part of it all is when I get completely serious e-mails from third- or fourth-year college students that look like cell text messages.

 

[Oddjob0226]

"for the love of god, it's "Would have" not "would of" "


to be considered gramatically correct should actually read:


"For the love of God, it's "would have", not "would of".


Especially note the capital letter at the front & period at the end. Linguist, heal thyself. Heal boy, heal!

(Psst....... that last part is a pun, a play on the word "heel". If the Internet medium was primarily verbal rather than visual you would of all realized that.)

Well, that's my post for this month. See you in October.

 

[TMF Jeff]

Actually, if we're going to start grading papers, I'm pretty sure the second comma should be inside the quotation marks, Oddjob.

 

[BrightEyes1082]

Jeff's right... the comma should be inside the quotes.

 

[maniactickler]

I go into chatrooms occasionally and the spelling is horrible. and these are adults!

 

[Oddjob0226]

Actually, if we're going to start grading papers, I'm pretty sure the second comma should be inside the quotation marks, Oddjob.

Jeff's bested me yet again! And a solitary tear falls in my darkness...

 

[Cav88]

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

 

[alchemy]

I swear, the internet is going to drive me to drink. What the hell do they teach in schools now?

Jeff, unfortunately, we live in a generation that seems to idolize ghetto-rat, superficial, urban street culture. How else would you explain some of the people on the show Cribs...they have more money than god, a house big enough for 2 zip codes, and are house-hold names....and they have no idea what the word "plural" means.

Also, It's my own personal belief that our society, in general, is simply getting dumber and dumber. The reason we thought Beavis and Butthead were so funny back then was because of how mindblowingly dumb they were. Now, some of these kids make them look like geniuses.

I think it's a product of civilization. It's not just the parents, it's not just the teachers, it's not just the government, it's not just the media...it's all of them plus more. It's simply a culture that prides itself upon it's chosen stupidity.

 

[storyteller]

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

Didn't that study also say that the reason for this was because the human mind already knew how these words were supposed to look and so automatically made the corrections? If so, that means the reader had learned, at some point not only how to read, but how to spell.