Why YSK?

The first person who typed “should of” probably heard of it in real life that was meant to be “should’ve”, they typed “should of” online and readers thought that it’s grammatically correct to say “should of” which is in fact wrong and it became widespread throughout the years on Reddit.

I hope something could start to change.

  • axtualdave@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Not until the definition of the word “of” changes. It is not a synonym for the word “have,” nor will be anytime soon.

    Perhaps, when speaking, accent, mush-mouthed laziness, or plain ignorance will confuse “should have” and “should of”, but one is objectively correct, and one is not.

    • raresbears@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Not until the definition of the word “of” changes.

      Well that’s what’s happening here isn’t it. It’s a word that is potentially gaining an additional use as a result of reanalysis. Whether it sticks around long term remains to be seen, but language is defined by usage and it’s foolish to pretend there’s such a thing as objectively correct. Already the use of the verb ‘to have’ to form the perfect in this case is quite different from it’s other meanings related to ‘to possess’. And that’s not even getting into you describing nonstandard usage as the result of ‘mush-mouthed laziness’ which is a whole nother can of worms.