'Murica.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
The use've 'Should of' needs to stop.
- Thread starter Gibbo
- Start date
- Status
'Murica.
There are recorded usages of "should of" that predates the European discovery of the Americas.
But yeah, twitter ruined kids minds or something.
Wowfunhappy
Member
OP it's a useful contraction. Sorry.
terrisus
Member
thisisneogaf.gif
There is a "should of" defense force? Oh my.
Lol, reminds me of the kids from Beyond Thunderdome
Lol, reminds me of the kids from Beyond Thunderdome
It's more "not getting worked up over non standard usage that existed for centuries" defense force.
Ignorance does not equal evolution
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
"Outloud." Hmm. You must have meant "aloud" or "out loud."
I can defiantly think of worst mistakes then that.
Deviation from the normal use (what you call ignorance) is exactly how language evolve.
Now personally, I'm not a huge fan of "should of", I'm pretty sure I've never used it, but that's a stylistic choice mostly (combined with the fact that my work often put me situations where standard English is expected) but I don't get upset when other people use it, especially in informal settings like the OP is talking about.
soulassssns
Banned
lol, same here.
Neuromancer
Member
I could of been a contender
Poodlestrike
Banned
Yeah, this is pretty much how I expected the thread to go when I clicked the title.
Fuck all y'all, though. Should of is an abomination that should die in a fire. It's not even evolving language, it's just wrong. Like "I could care less."
Fuck all y'all, though. Should of is an abomination that should die in a fire. It's not even evolving language, it's just wrong. Like "I could care less."
maquiladora
Member
Bigger then what?
I've been noticing that a lot lately as well, where's it coming from?
On purpose / by accident.
Risible
Member
I agree. I'm tired of the "language evolves" responses I see in every thread where grammar and language are discussed. Excusing shitty grammar and spelling as merely language evolving rather than people refusing to learn correct usage is enabling dullards.
It's gotten far worse in the last five to ten years or so.
helloresolven
Member
Yeah... because choice of prepositions in many phrases is so logical.
……forgetit
Member
Lol, native speakers don't give a shit about proper grammar, it's actually hilarious.
On accident is not even considered a mistake by most prescriptivists.
It's a generational thing, old people use "by accident", young people use "on accident".
Stop yelling at the proverbial kids to get off your metaphoric linguistic lawn.
I think you're romanticizing "correct grammar".
"Correct grammar" is merely taking a random point in time, picking up a dialect (which happened to be the dialect of rich white people, but that's surely just a coincidence) adding some random rules pulled out people asses and deciding that's "proper English".
There's nothing magical or special about "correct grammar", it's not superior in any measurable way (and there are linguistic ways to measure those things) to any of the many other English dialects.
Also, you're wrong in thinking it's gotten worse, English now is waaaaay more standardized than it has ever been.
Go read some old texts, if "should of" make you angry, that shit is going to give you an aneurysm.
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
I use should've but never have seen use've used.
maquiladora
Member
They could care less.
SeaOfMadness
Member
It's not non standard usage. Show me one publication in the 20th century or before where you see this written this way.
It's one thing to use it in speech. It's entirely different to see it in print. The latter makes anyone immediately seem uneducated. It's not grammatically correct.
sir_kevith
Member
Stuff like "there" vs "their" bothers me in the professional world but nothing really affects me during casual use. English is so inconsistent as far as context changing the word or not. I can tell what form of there/their was supposed to be used if someone gets it wrong. We don't police spoken language as much so I fail to see the point in correcting casual writing either.
Other than "should of" being prolific I don't see it creating any misunderstanding so I fail to see the OP's urgency.
Other than "should of" being prolific I don't see it creating any misunderstanding so I fail to see the OP's urgency.
SeaOfMadness
Member
You go right ahead thinking that way. I can tell you that if someone puts something like that on a resume, I stop reading.
14th century okay with you?
But if you like your grammatic outrage to be more 19th century, here's some Charlotte Bronte for you.
And since I said Charlotte Bronte, I get to post my favorite comics ever.
Yeah, it's not really related to what we're talking about, but life gives you only that many chances to make Bronte sisters jokes, you got to grab them by the horns!
I would of began clinging to the past if I knew how to spell.
It does on Facebook and whatnot since my peers are apparently dumb as hell and didn't pay attention in basic English classes, but at my job (I'm a professional grammar Nazi/Copyeditor), stuff like "should of" is way more annoying. I edit book descriptions for a major audiobook company, and it's amazing how terrible some writing is at the professional level.
sir_kevith
Member
You have horrible reading comprehension considering the first thing I say is that it bothers me in professional use.
I'm talking casual use like this forum where we use shit like 'lmao' and gifs to communicate. There's no sense in getting bent out of shape of some poor grammer here and their.
fuzzyreactor
Banned
Dear grammar police,
No one cares that the misuse of a word annoys you. You still comprehend what people are saying so stop being uptight.
Sincerly,
The World
No one cares that the misuse of a word annoys you. You still comprehend what people are saying so stop being uptight.
Sincerly,
The World
njean777
Member
That's kind of shallow tbh. Just another enabler of the systematic problems with our society.
Pretty much.
IndoAssassin
Banned
The people over they're do not realize there mistakes. Their clueless.
Is it? If one systematically fails at a basic task when trying to solicit work from him, why should he pursue? There are tools and self review that help fixing them. Having a resume littered with mistakes is lazy.
Hiring for the most part is a gamble. Isn't there a chance that this person doesn't care about his quality of work at all? More serious applicants tend to have good grammar.
- Status