Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Bizman on November 26, 2011, 03:46:47 AM
-
First I want to say that I don't want to offend anyone. This question has risen from purely wanting to know if my knowledge has been outdated.
It has been over a quarter of a century since my last English lessons and I have been told that a language is a living thing. Grammar rules can be officially changed when a certain expression gets common enough etc. Despite that I still feel uncertain about the orthodoxity of the following quotes from people living in America, most of them probably speaking English as their mother tongue:
...could of easily got the kill...
...I really wouldn't of wanted to be killed...
...I wouldn't of payed more then $60 for it...
...we shouldn't of cheered...
...they shouldn't of been...
...should of paid...
...If France hadn't of collapsed...
...If she hadn't of been delayed...
Those sentences make sense to me only if I read them out loud.
I was taught to use the auxiliary verb "have" instead of the particle "of" in this context. Now I am wondering, if this rule has been changed lately.
Can anyone with true knowledge of this matter help me?
-
lose the preposition. grab a verb.
-
...could have easily got the kill...
...I really wouldn't have wanted to be killed...
...I wouldn't have paid more than $60 for it...
...we shouldn't have cheered...
...they shouldn't have been...
...should have paid...
...If France hadn't collapsed...
...If she hadn't been delayed...
:)
-
...could've easily gotten the kill...
"Could've" can sound like "could of," but it's a common contraction for "could have" used in colloquial speech, like "should've" and "would've." The rules haven't changed. You shouldn't copy the other examples you gave.
-
I like "Aint" and "Caint"
"It ain't gonna happen"
"It cain't happen"
:D
-
I done never did understand that grammar stuff.
-
Wagger,
Don't you know double negatives are a no no?
-
Wazzat grammers? Whem? :headscratch:
-C+
-
I understand the whole 'language is a breathing thing' idea, but in my opinion that's about being creative with usage of words and combinations of words. But could of doesn't mean a damn thing. In that case it's not being a grammar nazi, it's just not being a flubbing idiot.
-
WOW! Thank you all for quick replies. :salute
@Hap: That's what I would have done anyways, according to what I have been taught.
@Rolex: That's why I've read those sentences out loud, to make them sound right.
@Cheese: Ain't "no no" a double negative as well?
@GNucks: Love you for that opinion!
-
This prolly makes alot of sence.
-
To the OP, I certainly don't think anyone is taking offense at your post, and your question is quite valid. I got the impression that it is an honest question from someone who wishes to improve their language skill.
If I may, I'd like to make a case for the original users to those who do seem to get upset by examples such as these. And, perhaps give some insight into the issue.
There is official English, just as there is official German, Spanish, et. al. However, there is also colloquial English just as there is for the others, along with regional dialects. Many Americans who have travelled to Mexico have certainly encountered this when their High School Spanish collided with both! :) The examples in the original post are colloquial English, and a very common divergence from proper English.
I often see people being corrected that were merely using their regional dialect, and spelling it as best they can. Other than Appalachian, and I have heard of but not seen, Cajun, there is no dialectic dictionary for them to refer to so far as I know.
American English has been classified as a separate dialect from British English, as the differences between them have become substantial enough to warrant the classifications.
American English has sub-dialects as well, such as New England, Midwestern, Appalachian, Southern, Cajun, etc. In strong cases, the sub dialect can be incomprehensible to the hearer. For example, my wife is originally from New York, and grew up in Tampa. Her parents still have a strong New York accent, especially her father who is from the Bronx. They also use the New England dialect. My Grandmother was born and raised in the deeply rural Appalachian Mountains, was primarily self-educated, and never left that area until her 70's. During a visit, she spoke at length with my wife. I had to interpret for my wife, and later re-tell some of the stories.
This is also a very good example of how languages evolve into new languages over time. English should eventually evolve into a family of languages. It will be an interesting study for someone in the future, as with the internet and fast travel, regions are not nearly as isolated as they once were. This should have a dramatic effect on the evolution of the dialects and their transition into languages.
I could delve further into the origins of the dialects, the factors that influence their progression, and so forth but that is far outside the scope of a simple forum reply. My point is simply that forum boards bring together people from all over the world, many of whom speak a regional dialect, and others who speak English as a second language. There are also varying levels of education, age, and experience. So unless an error causes the reader to not understand the message the writer intended, or perhaps to help a non-native English speaker to improve on their skills, I should think that corrections are generally unwarranted. I should also think that some of the more demeaning and insulting forms of correction that have been used by a few at times have most certainly been unwarranted.
-
Can anyone with true knowledge of this matter help me?
The rule has not changed. What you're hearing in every day use is a verbal conjunction of "couldn't" and "have" - "couldn't've", which sounds like "couldn't of".
-
" ...If France hadn't have collapsed..."
Oxymoron
Like:
-- Honest Lawyer ---
:rofl
NwBie
-
I like "Aint" and "Caint"
"It ain't gonna happen"
"It cain't happen"
:D
don't forget "main't."
-
MY big thing is "Don't you hate people that (blah blah, immaterial)
THAT, is NOT a @#$@$@!$ pronoun which is suitable for human beings! I even hear news broadcasters do this, blows my mind.
-
Thanks again, this thread has got more interesting than I ever could imagine. I have also learned a thing or two.
I had to check the word "oxymoron" in the online dictionary, wanting to know if that were a special, maybe linguistically challenging kind of a moron. To my surprise the Finnish word was the same, only spelled "oksymoron"! Thank Google I now know better.
@bj229r: What really pisses me off is, that after a rule breaking way of speaking gets common enough, the rule will officially be changed. They've done that here with a previously definite no no and the result mutilates my poor ears every time I hear or read it.
-
Read a letter or two from the 1800's..say..from a lowly enlisted soldier to his wife. Their command of the English language is ten-fold over most folks today.
example-- http://www.pastvoices.com/usa/baker63.shtml
Sergeant Neil A. Baker
Company F, 50th North Carolina
"We have good news! In today’s paper, our little Navy pitched into the blockading vessels at Charleston, South Carolina and cleared the Ranch—raised or opened the blockade without any loss on our side" Sergeant Neil A. Baker, Goldsboro, North Carolina February 1863
Camp Near Goldsboro, North Carolina—February 1863
Dear Jane—
Having a good opportunity of sending you a few lines by N. T. Watson, I embrace it. This leaves me in my usual health, hop[ing] this will reach you and the babies enjoying the same blessing. Mr. Watson goes home on furlough for 14 days also Jack Thomas and Sgt. John Godfrey. Again I am acting Quartermaster Sgt. Vice [for] Wm J. Kelley [who has] gone home upon furlough for 14 days.
Again, I am acting Quartermaster Sergeant,“Vice”. William J. Kelley [has] gone home upon furlough for 14 days. John B. McFarland got an indefinite detail (for not stated time) to work in Goldsboro upon Guns for Government and I am pretty certain that he will get a furlough too, to go after his tools. One man for every twenty-five gets furloughs, but you see, Sgt. Kelly or J. B. McFarland furloughs has nothing to do with the furloughs of those of the Company.
We have a good many visitors, Rob, David Thomas and wives and mother. Absolum Kelly and Getty Cox came today. John Buchanan and daughter and Jasper Thomas’s wife came last evening and some others that came before.
We have good news! In today’s paper, our little Navy pitched into the blockading vessels at Charleston, South Carolina and cleared the Ranch—raised or opened the blockade without any loss on our side. I still have very flattering hopes that we will soon have peace again in our land. I have a very strong opinion that in a few days, the number of furloughs will be increased for because if they are not, you see one for every 25 men, it would take nearly or quite all the year for all to get home at that rate. If there is no threatening movement of the enemy soon, I am confident that the number will be increased. I want to go in this or the first of next month if possible.
Nothing more worth your attention.
…Yours truly, Neill A. Baker
-
¢◎üʟḓ øḟ ℮αṧḯʟƴ ℊ☺⊥ ☂нℯ кїʟℓ...
ℑ ґℯαℓʟ¥ ẘ◎üℓ∂ᾔ❝т ☺ḟ ẘαη☂εⅾ тø ♭℮ кḯłℓεḓ...
Ї ẘ☺υℓḓᾔ❝⊥ øḟ ℘αƴℯⅾ μ◎ґ℮ т♄ℯη $60 ḟ☺ґ їт...
ẘ℮ ṧнøʊł∂η❝т øḟ ḉнℯℯґℯⅾ...
⊥нℯ¥ ṧℌ☺üʟⅾᾔ‷⊥ øƒ ß℮εη...
ṧ♄☺υł∂ ◎ƒ ρ@ḯḓ...
ℑƒ ℱґ@η¢ℯ нαⅾη‷⊥ ◎ḟ ḉ◎ʟłα℘ṧ℮ḓ...
Їḟ ṧнε нα∂ᾔ❝т ☺ƒ ßℯℯη ⅾεℓαƴεḓ...
-
so I always say "crap <chit> load" to indicate a whole fricking horde and their cousins. it's not in the dictionary, go ahead and sue me.
semp
-
I like "Aint" and "Caint"
"It ain't gonna happen"
"It cain't happen"
:D
Can't..
It can't happen. And couldn't, wouldn't, shouldn't have happened.. Or could've, would've, should've happened..
-
!F Y0U $0/\/\3|-|0\/\/ |)3(!P|-|3R +|-|!$ |_3++3R!|\|G, Y0U \/\/!|_|_ |\|0+!(3 +|-|@+ 1 @/\/\ U$!|\|G (0/\/\P|_3+3|_Y (ORR3(+ GR@/\/\/\/\@R.
And now for something completely different: picture (http://s3.amazonaws.com/kym-assets/entries/icons/original/000/000/013/allyourbase.jpg)
-
Some of you have spent too much time in the internetz get out now before its to late.
-
I don't object any new expressions being introduced in a language as such, since language really is a dynamic entity which survival in the long run is determined by its ability to transform. Although all the new expressions do not necessarily improve the ability of the language to express, say, complicated things but may even more or less reduce the information content while improving intelligibility.
The problems are different in languages with different structures but at least in Finnish the problem of simplification of words by omitting suffixes completely has been increased as new speakers of language have increased. Maybe it will make our language more survivable as it transforms in the process and becomes easier to adopt, but will the language also lose a lot of its expressivity in the process?
-C+