English Language Class/ Watson should of scored (sic)

Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
641
Location
West Berkshire
G2K: 1. Could've and should've are contractions, not lazy contractions, unless I am mistaken, which of course is possible.
Could've and should've are fine but surely you should have explained that they are contractions of 'should have' and 'could have' in order to illustrate why 'should of' and 'could of' are wrong?
 

IndoMike

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
29,074
Location
Touring Central Java...
Could've and should've are fine but surely you should have explained that they are contractions of 'should have' and 'could have' in order to illustrate why 'should of' and 'could of' are wrong?
Tx for your input, SG. Three reasons why I didn't:

1. The OP was getting long, and I thought if I kept on and on people might get bored with it and turn off
2. I didn't really want to get into the world of terminology (in this case "contractions") again due to fear of turning people off. But, as you will see, the word was raised quickly and followed up.
3. I assumed that people would know that "could've" = "could have".. what else could it possibly be a contraction for?

But, you're right to question, SG: there's always a better way to explain something. But I do want to try and keep it short and sweet.
If I post another one, please keep me on my toes and also offer up some suggestions.
 
Top