But you wouldn't know it, since so many fuckwitted morons use it every day.
There is STILL no such phrase/words as "should of, could of, would of"
|by Anonymous||reply 36||Last Wednesday at 6:54 PM|
Their they're, OP. Calm down. Your going to loose you're mind.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||10/02/2015|
"I could care less!"
|by Anonymous||reply 2||10/02/2015|
I should have viciously face slapped OP, I certainly could have viciously face slapped OP and I would have viciously face slapped OP if he/she was here with me.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||10/02/2015|
You really got your point acrost.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||10/02/2015|
Yeah, and there is no "i" after the "n"in aluminum but that doesn't stop Brits from pronouncing it "al u min i um." Language is very idiosyncratic in the real world OP. Not everyone is as perfect as we here at the DL.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||10/02/2015|
Isn't it: "could have, should have, would have" in that order?
Either way, I have never heard anyone say this in real life.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||10/02/2015|
Deep-seeded habits are hard to break. Loose the attitude, OP.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||10/02/2015|
If you're gonna whine about something, OP, get it right . . . . .
COULD-A, WOULD-A, SHOULD-A !
|by Anonymous||reply 8||10/02/2015|
Watch choo talkin bout, OP?
You really axskin for it.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||10/02/2015|
I'vd done forgot what I was going to say.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||10/02/2015|
You people are harsh. It's a doggie dog world for sure!
|by Anonymous||reply 11||10/02/2015|
It blows my mind how people don't realize that what they are hearing is "should've". As in, "should have". Writing "should of" is right up there with "supposably" as far as pet peeves.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||10/02/2015|
Suffice to say, I have a deep-seeded desire to give people who say "should of" there just desserts.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||10/02/2015|
You can't teach an old dog to fetch new sticks.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||10/02/2015|
Who could and should have wood?
|by Anonymous||reply 15||10/02/2015|
Alot of people spell that way. Their's nothing wrong with it.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||10/02/2015|
For all intensive purposes, this thread is close.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||10/02/2015|
This gets me so flustrated.....well, kindly flustrated.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||10/02/2015|
"Should've" is a perfectly acceptable contraction, but I've had several spellcheckers flag it. Maybe it's preferable to use it only in speaking, but not in writing.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||10/02/2015|
For all intensive purposes, could have and could of are the same.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||10/02/2015|
My car failed the emissions inspection. My mechanic says I have to get a new Cadillac converter.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||10/02/2015|
Oh FANK you OP for being such a tension whore!
|by Anonymous||reply 22||10/03/2015|
There is STILL no such words?
|by Anonymous||reply 23||10/03/2015|
OP is definately in the wrong website jandra if spelling is his fortay.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||10/03/2015|
Get over it, OP.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||Last Wednesday at 1:20 PM|
I wouldn’t step foot in OP’s house. He’s probably bunkered down in their.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||Last Wednesday at 1:28 PM|
That must’ve been OP’s brain that washed up in Michigan.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||Last Wednesday at 2:31 PM|
R25 is the 2015 bump troll.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||Last Wednesday at 3:29 PM|
I’ve never seen anyone write “should of” but if they say it, it’s a legitimate contraction of should have: should’ve It’s in the dictionary OP.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||Last Wednesday at 5:56 PM|
OP, the use of "should of," "could of," and "would of" bothers me, too, but I'm afraid it's too late to nip the problem in the butt.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||Last Wednesday at 6:03 PM|
You couldn’t be more wrong, R29. You’re part of the problem in not understanding that.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||Last Wednesday at 6:14 PM|
WTF? It's "Shoulda, Coulda, Woulda".
|by Anonymous||reply 32||Last Wednesday at 6:24 PM|
I taught at various community and four-year colleges for about six years, and now I work for admissions (reading essays) at a large public university, and I can tell you point blank what the problem is: these generations (anyone under 40) don't read. And because they don't read, they can't write. And even if they do read, their reading material is not up to snuff. For example, I read at least one misspelled word in the online WAPO every single day -- and I only read the first page!
I remember a student who wrote "It's a doggie dog world" in a paper, and I called him aside after class. I asked him, "What does that mean? Does that even make any sense to you?" He said, "Well, I thought, like, Snoop Doggy Dog." When I explained "it's a dog-eat-dog world" to him, he did admit that my suggestion made much more sense.
But the problem is that they NEVER see these words in print -- and that's why they spell them phonetically.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||Last Wednesday at 6:31 PM|
OP is LITERALLY losing his mind over this.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||Last Wednesday at 6:44 PM|
It’s a contraction, moron.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||Last Wednesday at 6:46 PM|
I concur, R33. I read admissions essays for a living, and I am astounded by the grammatical and spelling errors (like all of these above) and the inability of the writer to answer the essay question. 500 words and they go off on tangents which make no sense, have no relation to each other, and they sum up with a concluding statement which can turn their previous thoughts upside down.
I read a sentence of 108 words yesterday which had no punctuation, a few misspellings and changes in tense. The writer substituted "U" for "you" and "2moro" for "tomorrow". This is a university which accepts about 30% of its applicants. One of the rules of thumb: If we don't want our professors to have to deal with these kids for four years, we don't accept them.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||Last Wednesday at 6:54 PM|