Five lights don't work

[JohnD]

Your a pendant.

Were I to be the same, I might point out defects.

 

[morqthana]

You're a capitulating appeaser.

Whenever you try to make an argument for unfettered, uncorrected, mistake making becoming the new normal on the grounds that it's always happened, please try to consider the difference between a period without universal learning and without dictionaries giving spelling and definitions, and with foreign invaders bringing different languages in, and the period after those things all changed.

We don't hold to "scientific" ideas rooted in ignorance and we should not hold to the meanings of words changing because of it, as there is no longer any excuse.

Whoever was first to say "could of" when what they meant was "could have" was not engaged in evolving a living language, they were engaged in being wrong. They did it out of ignorance, and they added nothing to the language, they benefited it not at all. They just used the wrong word.

If you asked someone if they'd like a drink, and they replied "Yes, I'll of a pint have bitter, please", would you really think that was perfectly OK?

What if they were a non-native English speaker, would you ever, under any circumstances, consider putting them right, and explaining the difference between "of" and "have", or would you let them think that they were speaking correctly?

If the former, why?

 

[Taylortwocities]

I blame the Pet Shop Boys

It all started when they did a cover version of Willie Nelson’s
You We’re Always On My Mind

The original lyrics are:
Maybe I didn't love you
Quite as often as I could have
Maybe I didn't treat you
Quite as good as I should have…

Take a listen to the Pet Shop Boys version. Seems to me that “have” is replaced by “of”. Grrrr

 

[blup]

People say could’ve which gets written as could of.

 

[EFLImpudence]

People say could’ve which gets written as could of.

Yes, that is true but that is the problem; not a justification.


That the Pet Shop Boys pronounced it like that does not alter the spelling.

Where would we be if we spelt words the way they are pronounced in New Zealand or South Africa?

If enough people call a spider an insect, does it become one?

 

[Ian1981]

If it’s a company your bill will include the dreaded VAT too - so it’s not outrageous.

Most KSR lights are of very good quality with longer guarantees

Is the price reasonable considering the electrician does not appear to pay VAT i.e. VAT is specified as N/A on the invoice.

 

[blup]

Yes, that is true but that is the problem; not a justification.


That the Pet Shop Boys pronounced it like that does not alter the spelling.

Where would we be if we spelt words the way they are pronounced in New Zealand or South Africa?

If enough people call a spider an insect, does it become one?

Are you suggesting that they sing "could" and "have" as separate words. I guarantee you will have said "could've" in a way that sounds like "could of". Will you be admonishing yourself?

 

[EFLImpudence]

Are you suggesting that they sing "could" and "have" as separate words. I guarantee you will have said "could've" in a way that sounds like "could of". Will you be admonishing yourself?

FFS - It doesn't matter how they sing it and what it sounds like - the correct spelling doesn't alter.

No wonder the country is in a mess.

 

[morqthana]

Yes, that is true but that is the problem; not a justification.

+1

Where would we be if we spelt words the way they are pronounced in New Zealand or South Africa?

Or in this country. I mean what's the name for that trough people have in their houses which they fill with hot water and get into to wash? South of a certain vaguely defined line the spelling does not become 'barth'.

If enough people call a spider an insect, does it become one?

It would seem so.

 

[morqthana]

Are you suggesting that they sing "could" and "have" as separate words. I guarantee you will have said "could've" in a way that sounds like "could of".

Not necessarily.

And anyway "could've" is a shortening of "could have", not "could of", something which is plain from the letters, so no matter how it sounds, "could of" both flies in the face of what is written and does not make sense.

 

[blup]

FFS - It doesn't matter how they sing it and what it sounds like - the correct spelling doesn't alter.

No wonder the country is in a mess.

Yes Portugal isn't doing too well atm. Put it this way, if you order fruit salad would you complain if 60 per cent of it was that well known fruit, tomato?

 

[morqthana]

I blame the Pet Shop Boys

But we only have Willie Nelson to blame for the fact that the lyrics are

Maybe I didn't treat you
Quite as good as I should have

and not

Maybe I didn't treat you
Quite as well as I should have

 

[EFLImpudence]

Stop digging Blup.

 

[blup]

Not necessarily.

And anyway "could've" is a shortening of "could have", not "could of", something which is plain from the letters, so no matter how it sounds, "could of" both flies in the face of what is written and does not make sense.

Not necessarily.

And anyway "could've" is a shortening of "could have", not "could of", something which is plain from the letters, so no matter how it sounds, "could of" both flies in the face of what is written and does not make sense.

The best version is a clear could’ve, but my point was in relation to the spoken word as opposed to the written. If you're going to be a grammar nasty, at least be consistent.

 

[morqthana]

The best version is a clear could’ve, but my point was in relation to the spoken word as opposed to the written. If you're going to be a grammar nasty, at least be consistent.

"Should've/could've/would've" may be how "should of" etc could often be pronounced, but that doesn't help your argument because there is no correct use of the phrases "should of", "could of" etc - they are never right, it's always "should have", "could have".

I am consistent.

I said that it isn't necessarily the case that someone would pronounce "could have" "could've". But even when they do, as the writing shows that it's a contraction of "could have", when the sense is clearly "could have", and when "could of" is not something which is ever correct then there can never be a valid reason to ever write "could of".

But as you seem to think that someone who believes that words should be used according to watt they mien is nasty, I don't think you will ever understand.