Could/Would/Should/Must/Might of

[NeoFrank1]

Is there any way we can put a stop to this particularly egregious form of internet illiteracy?

I get that language is constantly evolving, but there is no need to use "could of" when the user clearly means "could have." It's not as though "could have" utilizes an unnecessary or worthless rule, such as the distinction between "who" and "whom." In fact, it makes perfect sense, whereas "could of" does not.

I see this error so often now that I'm afraid it's already too late. Has already it entered our lexicon? Was there anything I could of done to stop it?

 

[Brownjohn]

I see what you did there.

 

[Afflicted]

You could of started an online petition...

 

[Thekrakrabbit]

I see what you did there too.....sneaky

 

[c0rnpwn]

Yo, the rule for who and whom is not unnecessary.
That's like using he for him. I bought he the book. Look how dumb that sounds!

 

[NeoFrank1]

[quote name='c0rnpwn']Yo, the rule for who and whom is not unnecessary.
That's like using he for him. I bought he the book. Look how dumb that sounds![/QUOTE]

Who are you talking to?

 

[Afflicted]

[quote name='NeoFrank1']Who are you talking to?[/QUOTE]

I believe he must of been talking to you.

 

[NeoFrank1]

I agree he might of been, but he defiantly should of made it clear who he was talking to.

 

[Viol8tor]

wat

 

[needler420]

So one guy never failed his English class and now he's a grammar Nazi.

 

[Thekrakrabbit]

Grammar Nazis generally like to correct grammer, but for some reason constantly slip up as well.

 

[Afflicted]

[quote name='NeoFrank1']I agree he might of been, but he defiantly should of made it clear who he was talking to.[/QUOTE]


yes... it would of made sense for him to have used quotes that way everyone might of known who he was referring to.

 

[Ziv]

it. It's not worth it.