Reply
Thu 6 Jan, 2011 06:17 am
In American forums, I've often found the expression "should of".
I believe it refers to "should've". The pronunciation, however, of the "should of" and of the "should've" is different.
So why could the mistake be so frequent there?
@oristarA,
should've is short for
"should have", not "should of".
"should of" is not grammatically correct...
@oristarA,
Whether or not it's a mistake is a matter for debate. However, i personally agree that "should of" ought to be rendered as "should have." As for pronunciation, i think you should hesitate to tell Americans how they pronounce words. Many Americans would pronouce "should of" and "should've" in the same way.
@Setanta,
woulda, shoulda, coulda...
@Region Philbis,
Region Philbis wrote:
woulda, shoulda, coulda...
It is Shorthand English... It Means: I've been sold a ticket to the past that has already been punched...
We often forget how much a language can reflect the people who use it, and American English often reflects a people who hate talk and love action... We cannot all be French, after all...
@Region Philbis,
It's not really a matter of grammar so much as it is phonology and spelling. Ask Om about the latter. He can set you on the straight and narrow.
@Region Philbis,
Region Philbis wrote:
woulda, shoulda, coulda...
is better as wouda shouda couda
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace