Would you had changed your mind. Would you have changed your mind. Should Technically, should is the past tense of shall , but it is an auxiliary verb with a few uses, not all of which are in the past tense, namely, the following:.
Should you have erased the disk? Should I turn in my assignment now? Here, should means about the same thing as ought. You should floss and brush your teeth after every meal. Think of should as supposed to, as in the previous example, but here to make a persuasive statement. If I should find your coat, I will be sure to call you.
Think of should as do ; furthermore, should could be left out of the above sentence, leaving, " If I find your coat, I will be sure to call you. Should you wish to do so, you may have hot tea and biscuits. With an early start, they should be here by noon. Think of should as ought to or probably will.
I should like to go home now. I should think that a healthy forest program is essential to any presidential victory. Could Technically, could is the past tense of can, but it is an auxiliary verb with a few uses, not all of which are in the past tense, namely the following:. In those days, all the people could build houses. Could you have erased the disk? Could I leave now? You could study harder than you do. He knew the sunset could be spectacular. I could be wrong.
Could you come over here, please? If you add the word "could," the sentence doesn't make sense:. That sentence doesn't work because Joe's obligation to call his mom has nothing to do with whether he "could" is able to call her.
It's still his obligation and the right thing to do. But, if you were to say:. You're talking about a situation that is possible or imagined; Joe "would" call his mom, but due to circumstances, he may not be able to do so.
You could add the phrase "if he could" to the sentence and it would still make sense:. Another way to think of it is "should" is "solid"—it is something that ought to happen. As noted, in general usage, "should" implies an obligation or something that ought to be done, and "would" implies something that is possible.
However, in formal British English, there is an alternative use for "should," which reverses its meaning compared to American English. In formal British English, a person might say:. In this case, "should" does not mean a sense of obligation or something that ought to happen. Used as such, its meaning is closer to the word "would," as in something that is possible. Indeed, in American Engish, a speaker would say or a writer would write:. This means that being given a cup of tea is something that might happen, but it might not, This, then, is actually the meaning a person is conveying if she is using formal British English.
Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Use precise geolocation data. Select personalised content. You feel me? Heck, I'm a foreigner and it ruffles my feathers when I see the abomination that is "would of". What surprises me though is that more often than not it's natives who use it..? And I can't really blame that on homophony because I'm fairly certain everybody who was ever taught English in school learned that "would've" results from abbreviating "would have".
Misspelling "definitely" is excusable but not fundamental things like that. That's simply slaughtering the language. In fact, it's rather funny. Homophonous words are spelled completely differently whereas homophonous-looking words sound nothing alike. Like deaf and leaf. Or couch and touch. It's my personal banana skin. Compared to other languages, English pronunciation is all over the place no offense.
Arsen Jun Here is an instance where "would of" is used correctly! Of course, it can only occur where correct punctuation has been used. Vincenzo Jan This just makes me nuts. Paulytical Jan If G'day and C'mon are accepted in the English language why not "would of" especially with the vast range of English speaking accents, it is getting harder to set English spelling or grammar as written in the Queens English. And with that now being the dominant culture you are more likely to see the Americanized version instead of the Americanised version.
However, I recently found an American using "would of", "could of". John Gibson Feb My original comment still stands. Above all, language should make sense, it should convey a thought. And 6x16 is I did confirm that with a calculator why not? Paulytical Feb I wonder, regarding the use of 'would of', if it is more used in certain countries or if it is equally spread over the English speaking countries?
My first thought was that this must be an Australian English dialect Does it occurr also in England and in the USA? Carl Feb Carl - as this excellent post by linguist Stan Carey at Sentence First shows, it is fairly ubiquitous.
Warsaw Will Feb I was really disappointed that House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski utilizes "would of" instead of the correct "would have," as well--takes the book down a few notches, unfortunately.
Hill May This error really shows poor basic education when done by a native speaker. A normally educated native speaker should be able to distinguish between "have" and "of" even though both may sound similar when contracted in spoken English.
It's a different story for non-native speakers. But they often know even better because they've gone through their fair bit of studying grammar. Steve5 Jun Students of English in Brazil, students who learn English as a second language, who most of the time learn oral and written English grammar separately because they make more sense this way , would never make such a mistake. Apparently it's not only American. I'm Australian and I use it. Until a few days ago, when someone at work pointed it out to me, I had no idea it should be "have" and not "of".
I still find it weird to use "have" in some contexts, such as "would have had"; it sounds a bit redundant. Bloggers love comments. Make my day and leave your thoughts in the Reply section below. Categories: Grammar and Usage Tags: could of , errors , grammar , grammar errors , modal verbs , modals , should of , would of. One of his passions is to teach young people how to write better. View all posts by Brian Wasko.
When a Preposition Is an Adverb. I found this very interesting. I also get annoyed when people say would of or could of. Instead of have. One thing I find most annoying is the mispronunciation of the word specific. Why do people say Pacific?.
0コメント