"Of" and "have"

[johns]

Hi all.

I noticed a few months ago, but I'm not sure how long it's been going on, that a lot of people of various internet websites and forums across a wide range of interests are getting the words "of" and "have" confused.

Examples...

They will write, "I could of told you that" or "I would of gone down the shop but it was raining" and so on and so forth.

Has anyone else noticed this? Is it a recent thing or has it been going on for a while? Or have I misunderstood English for the past few decades?

[Wickerman]

Yes, this idiosyncrasy has been noticed, though I have not taken note if this is a British phenomena or Americanism

[Stewart P Evans]

Bad English

It's just bad English of course, it should be 'have' in these examples. The proliferation of bad grammar and English seems to be increasing.

[RivkahChaya]

People have been doing that in the US for decades, and it makes me nuts. So does "taken for granite," and pluralising any word ending in -s by adding an "i" to the end. Octopi, feti, penii (for penis). I even saw walri once, but I think that was a joke.

"Between you and I" also makes me nuts. Any misuse of a nominative pronoun as the object of a preposition bugs me, but "between you and I" was a recurring line in a popular song once.

Don't get me started on "literally." Or misuse of "Begs the question."

[Phil H]

People speak as they HEAR - and "of" for "have" has been colloquial English (in the UK) for as long as I can recall.

Similar is "nuffink" for "nothing".

I don't know how someone who does not ennunciate clearly or pronounce words properly CAN learn to spell, since the sound he/she hears, and how it is spelled must seem out of kilter!

Language changes. Americans seem to use the phrase "status quo" as in "all is status quo" to mean all is OK or alright/as it should be.

Its proper use is, as I understand it: as it was - the position beforehand. But then, UK and America are two countries separated by a single language, are they not?

Phil

[Ally]

I am sure that you all are aware of how this misuse arose, but consider non-native speakers or just barely literate people who hear us speak and then try to match that to the written word. "I could've done that if ..." " I should've done that...". Most people will come to think the correct translation is "I could of".

I have many memories as a child of those "aha!" moments when the words on the page finally caught up to the words I heard or vice versa. I think I was in high school before I realized awry was not pronounced aw-ree even though I'd been saying "uh- rye" for years. For some reason the spelling/phonetic connection was never made with those two words for me. Because English does not sound like it's spelled and half our words break our own rules. Having had to teach Deaf kids for years who are taught k makes a 'k' sound for pronouncing (though they can't hear it) and then try to explain to them why they wouldn't pronounce k-nife when they are trying to read it.

English makey no sensey.


(P.S I suck at phonetic spelling so deal.)

[Robert]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPgo6s1lBbw

[Supe]

I notice that on many British sports message boards that the "could of" solecism is quite prevalent whereas the American pronunciation seems more "coulda" than "could of."

When I was teaching in the 70s I first noticed an occasional "alot" for a lot and just considered it an abberation. Now, though, it seems pandemic. Much like a couple hundred years ago per centum was standard. Then it became per cent. (note period), then just per cent and finally percent.

My current bugbear is the double conditional "If I would have . . ." (or "would of") rather than the single conditional "If I had . . ." I wonder, is a double conditional like a double negative and yields the opposite of what the writer intended?

Don.

[Smoking Joe]

Heres complete confusion if you so like. The text ,spelling is weird but the message
gets through anyhow.Strange how the Brain trans;lates words.

7H15 M3554G3
53RV35 7O PROV3
HOW OUR MINDS C4N
DO 4M4ZING 7HING5
1MPR3551V3 7HING5
1N 7H3 B3G1NN1NG
17 WA5 H4RD BU7
NOW ON 7H15 LIN3
YOUR M1ND 1S
R34D1NG 17
W17H OU7 3V3N
7HINK1NG 4BOU7 17
B3 PROUD ONLY
C3R741N P3OPL3 C4N
R3AD 7H15

According to a research er at cambridge university it doesnt matter whsat the letters in a word are,or how its spelt,only that the first and last letter be in the right place....apostrophes, commas full stops the same .Whatever the resultant mess it will still be read without any problem,because the human mind doesnt read each letter individually.....makes one wonder if correct spelling really matters .Im not sure if Im totally convinced

[Supe]

Joe,

makes one wonder if correct spelling really matters .

Just ask the relevant Cambridge researchers who did the study if they would accept, say, a doctoral thesis written in the garbled prose they champion as being quite understandable.

Don.

[Wickerman]

7H15 M3554G3
53RV35 7O PROV3
HOW OUR MINDS C4N
DO 4M4ZING 7HING5
1MPR3551V3 7HING5
1N 7H3 B3G1NN1NG
17 WA5 H4RD BU7
NOW ON 7H15 LIN3
YOUR M1ND 1S
R34D1NG 17
W17H OU7 3V3N
7HINK1NG 4BOU7 17
B3 PROUD ONLY
C3R741N P3OPL3 C4N
R3AD 7H15

Now I don't feel so bad about my occasional spelling faux pas.

[Smoking Joe]

Supe,
Im guessing they would protest a little. But it's surprising how easily that garbled prose is read.

Regards

[RivkahChaya]

I don't know how someone who does not ennunciate clearly or pronounce words properly CAN learn to spell, since the sound he/she hears, and how it is spelled must seem out of kilter!

I can use "dost" and "doth" correctly in writing if I need to, even though I never speak them. I can spell and correctly use a lot of words I've seen and never heard.

Language changes. Americans seem to use the phrase "status quo" as in "all is status quo" to mean all is OK or alright/as it should be.

I don't know an American who uses it this way, but it may be something young people use the way you describe. Literally, it means "The state which," so it's incomplete, as a Latin phrase. I don't think it was ever used in Classical Latin, and really only dates back a few hundred years, to the phrase "status quo ante bellum," or "the way things were before the war," which gets used figuratively all the time. There's a legal term "status quo ante litem," and has something to do with the expiration of temporary restraining orders, and other temporary orders, like powers of attorney.

If people are misunderstanding "quo" as an adjective that means "normal," ie, "status is quo," then they would be misusing the phrase, but if saying "status quo" to mean "things are OK" is a shorthand way of saying that "nothing has changed since the last time you asked, when things were also just fine," it makes sense to me.

Its proper use is, as I understand it: as it was - the position beforehand. But then, UK and America are two countries separated by a single language, are they not?

"The position before" is "status quo ante."

Heres complete confusion if you so like. The text ,spelling is weird but the message gets through anyhow. [see post]

It's too often that there are ambiguities. When there aren't, you're fine, but go read the "Johnto/John too" thread. Or, punctuate this: "Woman without her man is nothing."

[Phil H]

On "status quo" Rivkah, I drew my information from US TV series.

On your ability to understand and spell, I don't doubt it, your intellectual power shines out in every post you write, you are evidently educated, erudite, well-read and exceptionally widely informed.

I too can relate to Shakespeare, understand how he uses words to fit the metre etc; If writing fiction, I can deliberately mis-spell words to suggest brogue or accent, or the way a word can be used by someone ill-educated.

In writing:

I don't know how someone who does not ennunciate clearly or pronounce words properly CAN learn to spell, since the sound he/she hears, and how it is spelled must seem out of kilter!

I was thinking of those who come from a background which contains few, if any books in the home, in which they are not encouraged to read outside school and where a regional accent - in the UK, for instance, Scouse (Liverpool) or Geordie (Newcastle) - is used in the home with all the ellisions and rythmns of speach that might entail. Perhaps I did not specifically mention that and should have done.

Phil

[kensei]

How about "a whole 'nother"?

When Stewie on "Family Guy" once imagined himself as dictator of America I think he declared that anyone who said that particular phrase needed to go to jail or something like that.