It's "could have been", not "could of been"

Zeus said:

Since we are indulging in recreational complaining about the brutalization of the English language -

"Hopefully, the dog will come home" means that the dog will come home full of hope. It does not mean "I hope the dog will come home" which is likely what the speaker was intending to communicate.

"If you need anything else, my name is Jennifer". This raises (but most definitely does not beg) the question of what the speaker's name is if I do not need anything else.
​

There. I feel better now (even if no one else does).

Click to expand...

Two'f my Favorites!! Nicely done!!

Honestly, though, such Butchery does not so much annoy as it does amuse me. And I often feel Morally Obligated to parcel out some Punitive Excrement to such speech ~ lovingly applied, of course.

ctpatsfan77 said:

The subjunctive appears to be a lost cause.

Click to expand...

It sure appears to is. (Wait, can't I just use any form of "to be" to end that thought? I mean, since language is completely arbitrary? And let me plus, thought me agree alongwith.)

The fact is that language has no use if it's arbitrary. Even if you're speaking a secret language you and your twin invented in the forest, language must be a shared phenomenon to have any value.

I have to say, not to pick on anybody, that one guy here used "blue collar" correctly in one post (actually, close enough to be understood, although a "grammar nazi" would say it needed a hyphen). And then I think it was the same guy who said "blue color guys" in another post. I swear it took me about three beats to realize he wasn't talking about



So that was just one moment. Of course I moved on. And of course, if we take things to extremes, we can make our writing equally unreadable. The classic example is "That is a situation up with which I shall not put."

It's nice to let out my inner pedant here Where I work you can't take a leak without splashing the shoes of a PhD, and they all think they are excellent writers. To make matters worse, I have to edit for both print and Web (think blogs), and I write speeches as well. Spoken language is not written language -- that's speechwriting 101.

The best way to write the world's worst speech is to try to write "correctly." If you want to write the world's worst post, just "write what you're thinking" with no inner editor, or just "write as you'd talk."

It's an excuse that covers so much ground that people here -- not in this thread, but elsewhere on Patsfans -- write truly indecipherable gibberish. The more heated they get, the more indecipherable the writing. So it actually becomes impossible not to laugh, because you can tell how excited the person is by how little of the post you understand. I suppose it's communication, in a way.

I think it's important for my Fellow Grammar Nazis and I to keep ever in mind that all Languages are in a constant State of Flux: I, for one, can't understand a damned thing that Shakespeare is trying to say.

And he, in turn, would've probably had a very difficult time understanding King Arthur.

That's why it doesn't bother me when new Expressions, Figures of Speech, Adaptations, and such emerge.

I find some far more enjoyable than others, mind you.

And I think that there's an enormous difference between the Evolution of a Language...and its Devolution.

Wax Frog said:

... and then there's tenants standing in for tenets.

Click to expand...

I've seen testicle and tentacle interchanged.

Mrs.PatsFanInVa said:

I've seen testicle and tentacle interchanged.

Click to expand...

I am so sick of reading about Caitlyn (nee Bruce) Jenner.

Seriously: That must've been painful.

Mrs.PatsFanInVa said:

I've seen testicle and tentacle interchanged.

Click to expand...

That's a whole genre of adult anime.

Off The Grid said:

I think it's important for my Fellow Grammar Nazis and I to keep ever in mind that all Languages are in a constant State of Flux: I, for one, can't understand a damned thing that Shakespeare is trying to say.

Click to expand...

Shakespeare is easier than you think... if you get stuck, don't be ashamed and go to the Cliff notes (or the Web equivalent.) You get the hang of it. He's very close to modern English... and speaking of neologisms and turns of phrase, we owe an enormous number of figures of speech and words themselves to this one dude. The plots are engrossing once you're past the stumbling block.

And he, in turn, would've probably had a very difficult time understanding King Arthur.

Click to expand...

Providing that Arthur actually spoke any form of English very well... there's a theory out there that Arthur was among the last of the Romans posted in Britain. Mists of time and all that.

But another comparison would be Beowulf... Shakespeare is very close to modern English, but Beowulf isn't recognizable to the modern English speaker. In between is Chaucer... once you know "yclept" means "named" and a couple of other things, you can stumble along pretty well with only a few checks for meaning per page. It's probably like a native Spanish speaker reading Portuguese, as opposed to Latin (assuming he never learned either of them formally).

That's why it doesn't bother me when new Expressions, Figures of Speech, Adaptations, and such emerge.

I find some far more enjoyable than others, mind you.

And I think that there's an enormous difference between the Evolution of a Language...and its Devolution.

Click to expand...

Plus ça change and all that... there's nothing permanent but change. The question in my mind is how you define evolution and devolution. It looks like you think of it as completely dependent on personal preference

I love the running gag on Futurama where the correct word for "ask" is "ax."

That reminds me. An escape is when you evade capture. An excape is Superman's hand-me-downs.

YOUGOTMOSSED said:

"Hopefully," as used in that sentence, is an adverb not modifying anything.

One of my favorites is when someone offers the "honest truth" to seem extra sincere. "You want the honest truth?" No, that's okay. I'll settle for the dishonest truth.

Click to expand...

Sorry to do this, but I must respectfully disagree. "Hopefully" does indeed modify the manner in which the dog will come home. I have heard some express a similar thought by saying "the dog will hopefully come home.". In either usage, "hopefully" most certainly does not mean "I hope" or "we hope," which is what the speaker intended to communicate.

Well, now I've done what I do not like to do - engage in a nitpicking argument about grammar (or anything else). Sorry - I couldn't help myself. All in good fun ...

Zeus said:

Sorry to do this, but I must respectfully disagree. "Hopefully" does indeed modify the manner in which the dog will come home. I have heard some express a similar thought by saying "the dog will hopefully come home.". In either usage, "hopefully" most certainly does not mean "I hope" or "we hope," which is what the speaker intended to communicate.

Well, now I've done what I do not like to do - engage in a nitpicking argument about grammar (or anything else). Sorry - I couldn't help myself. All in good fun ...

Click to expand...

I get what you're saying but I think it's a matter of context. It's like saying, "hopefully, it doesn't rain today" when you mean "I hope it doesn't rain today." Clearly, the rain (or non rain) can't be hopeful so the adverb isn't actually modifying anything. I see your "dog" example the same way but it really is picking a nit.

PatsFanInVa said:

That's a whole genre of adult anime.

Click to expand...

From the Reddit Bears game thread:

Ketsuryuukou 820 points 8 months ago



Patriots offense= tentacles

Bears defense= Japanese school girl.

Hey, nobody is perfect. Afterall, we are all only huming beans.

Tony2046 said:

You cannot create a BS sentence to support your "Could of, Could have" argument.

Click to expand...

The fact that you find that so absurd illustrates my point. Words have meanings and even your charitable acceptance relies on consistent application.

What is funny is that, I'm a songwriter and probably the most liberal writer in the crowd I run with. Most of my friends like the words on the page to be precise enough to read clearly on their own, whereas I think the music does the heavy lifting and the lyrics should be parsed down to only what is necessary. I also enjoy nailing together phrases in odd shapes to see if I can get a fresh spin on something, or convey an idea in a unique way.

Interestingly, you'd think that a willy nilly approach to grammar would aid in this free form writing, but I've found the opposite to be true; that better understanding of language helps you break the rules with more creative flair.

Tony2046 said:

OR you could politely correct their grammar errors.

Click to expand...

Isn't that what this thread is for?

Off The Grid said:

People don't say " could of". They say "could've."

Yet some write "could of"...because they're Donkeys.

There is no colloquial Value to "could of".

It is not an Expression or a Figure of Speech.

It's just Gibberish.

Click to expand...

Winner.

Mrs.PatsFanInVa said:

I've seen testicle and tentacle interchanged.

Click to expand...

On one of the very rare occasions I watched a daytime trash talkshow, I was rewarded with a classic line. A young woman said her boyfriend told her he couldn't get her pregnant because he had only one technical!

IcyPatriot said:

Out-Physicaled ....
WTF with that non word.

Click to expand...

He must've been beasting!

ctpatsfan77 said:

Click to expand...

I quit comics when Watterson and Larson retired. I still miss them.

Wax Frog said:

On one of the very rare occasions I watched a daytime trash talkshow, I was rewarded we ith a classic line. A young woman said her boyfriend told her he couldn't get her pregnant because he had only one technical!

Click to expand...

I work in Washington, DC, so people of all levels of familiarity with standard English have cause to talk about the "fiscal year." Some here substitute the term "physical year," usually in spoken form but sometimes in writing. ::shrug:: It happens.

This thread is going to cause some grammar nazi to kick my ass in the future. Who knows how much of this has sunken into my mind. I laughed when I saw the word helmut and then for a brief second i questioned the actual spelling lol.

Oswlek said:

The fact that you find that so absurd illustrates my point. Words have meanings and even your charitable acceptance relies on consistent application.

What is funny is that, I'm a songwriter and probably the most liberal writer in the crowd I run with. Most of my friends like the words on the page to be precise enough to read clearly on their own, whereas I think the music does the heavy lifting and the lyrics should be parsed down to only what is necessary. I also enjoy nailing together phrases in odd shapes to see if I can get a fresh spin on something, or convey an idea in a unique way.

Interestingly, you'd think that a willy nilly approach to grammar would aid in this free form writing, but I've found the opposite to be true; that better understanding of language helps you break the rules with more creative flair.



Isn't that what this thread is for?

Click to expand...

Wrong. It was your argument I found absurd, not the sentence. Words have definitions and people use them to express thought or meaning. Trying to understand the thought someone is tying to convey whether it is lyrically or through a conversation is what is important. Your original argument was in regards to "could of" and not "Cat. po,in...t: aopaust: Do'n'T". One of them I could easily understand and the other I would have to have repeated although realistically no one is going to walk up to me and seriously say "Hey Buddy, Cat. po,in...t: aopaust: Do'n'T".

I do not have a charitable acceptance of intent or meaning but I do have of the manner in which they were conveyed. If you honestly feel that someone utilizing "could of" instead of "could have" is a travesty then I think you are becoming overly pretentious in your pursuit of the gift of gab.

Tony2046 said:

Wrong. It was your argument I found absurd, not the sentence.

Click to expand...

You found the argument absurd because you found the sentence absurd. It is one and the same and, again, it illustrates my point.

Tony2046 said:

If you honestly feel that someone utilizing "could of" instead of "could have" is a travesty then I think you are becoming overly pretentious in your pursuit of the gift of gab.

Click to expand...

And if you honestly think that "travesty" was used without hyperbole and humor (particularly in light of the smiley immediately afterward) then.... well I don't know what I'll think, but I'm sure it is something serious!