they shoodof locked it soonerDon't listen to EFLI, I can't bawl him out on Winston's excellent thread entitled "Yet more censorship", someone seems to have locked it. Can't think why.
they shoodof locked it soonerDon't listen to EFLI, I can't bawl him out on Winston's excellent thread entitled "Yet more censorship", someone seems to have locked it. Can't think why.
This may or may not be true depending on how the evolution's occurred. Are you advocating we should still be speaking and writing just as Shakespeare?All such evolution is the result of ignorant mistakes - unless you think someone has decided to do it on purpose for some unknown reason.
You're obviously entitled to that opinion, but I would remind you that it's never me who initiates these discussions about "should of".I have not read all the thread because in my opinion you are writing nonsense for the sake of it.
Indeed, which is exactly what I do when 'should have' becomes " should've" - since that is how I pronounce it. What you have to undertsand is that, in relation to your comment:'I have' becomes 'I've' because that is how people pronounce it; dropping both the 'h' and 'a' ...
.... written English is not phonetic. There are countless examples in written English of 'silent letters' or, as in this case, of situations in which one has to insert an implied 'vowel sound' (implied by the apostrophe) between what would otherwise be an unpronounceable string of two or more consecutive consonants - that's why, as I said, I pronounce it as " should-erv " (the 'e' being a 'vowel sound' implied by the apostrophe) - since, as you say, " shouldve" (without the apostrophe implying a vowel sound) would be unpronounceable.'Should've' is not how it is said; that is unpronouncable ...
As I said at the start, I do not see this as 'evolution', at least not evolution during my lifetime. What I have written today I could have written about 60 years ago.Your penchant for willingly accepting, and apparently celebrating, the evolution of language ....
If that happened (in terms of writing, not 'saying'), then it would probably represent an 'evolution of language' (which some people might then want to oppose/criticise) - but it hasn't happened (and probably never will).... means that if enough people start saying 'should of' some nincompoop at a dictionary will redefine 'of' as also meaning 'have' ...
'Should've' is not how it is said; that is unpronouncable unless you say it as 'should ve' which you don't because there has to be a vowel sound between the 'd' and 'v' to make it sound like 'should av'.
Some word in our language don't even contain vowels, does that make 'm unpronouncable?
Some word in our language don't even contain vowels, does that make 'm unpronouncable?'Should've' is not how it is said; that is unpronouncable unless you say it as 'should ve' which you don't because there has to be a vowel sound between the 'd' and 'v' to make it sound like 'should av'.
As we've discussed so often, you are obviously right in saying that evolution of language can, by definition, only happen if someone initially starts using language which is 'incorrect' at the time. That incorrectness may be due to 'ignorant mistakes', or laziness, but may also be deliberate if it is felt that the changes make the language 'simpler', more logical or whatever - for example, the latter is probably the basis of a fair bit of the evolution (particularly of spelling) of the traditional English language into 'American English'.All such evolution is the result of ignorant mistakes - unless you think someone has decided to do it on purpose for some unknown reason.
Where did that come from - I certainly didn't write/type it
No I know you didn't, I edited it, probably while you were writing.Where did that come from - I certainly didn't write/type it
Kind Regards, John
Yes, I saw that - after I'd posted mine. As you say, I think I must have been typing mine whilst you were editing yoursNo I know you didn't, I edited it, probably while you were writing.
to avoid confusion of far too many 's.ignorant mistakes - someon (Edit; in this case Sunray) has decided to do it on purpose
I am not, never have been and never will be 'a sparky'
Kind Regards, John
No, it's discussion.
For very good reasons.Hmmm ok, your always having a pop at each other... There's commonly a thread started for the attention of a particular person
Hmmm ok, your always having a pop at each other... There's commonly a thread started for the attention of a particular person

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local