[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Would of...

Posted: 6/20/2006 10:26:40 AM EDT

This irks me to no end.

I would of stopped for the light if I could officer.

or

I would have stopped for the light if I could officer.

?

Posted: 6/20/2006 10:27:48 AM EDT

[#1]

Wouldn't have

Posted: 6/20/2006 10:32:09 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
Wouldn't have

+.9bar

Posted: 6/20/2006 10:33:23 AM EDT

[#3]

would of should of could of

Posted: 6/20/2006 10:33:28 AM EDT

[#4]

That's why the contraction is "would've".

Posted: 6/20/2006 10:33:32 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
+.9bar

Posted: 6/20/2006 10:33:35 AM EDT

[#6]

"Would have" is proper written usage. However, in spoken language, things tend to mash up and get slurred. So, "wood-uhv" is an acceptable way to pronounce it.

Posted: 6/20/2006 10:37:06 AM EDT

[#7]

wooda

Posted: 6/20/2006 10:39:11 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
"Would have" is proper written usage. However, in spoken language, things tend to mash up and get slurred. So, "wood-uhv" is an acceptable way to pronounce it.

Yeah, but "wood-uhv" is proper pronounciation of "would've", which is still a contraction of "would have", and means "would of" is still wrong.

Posted: 6/20/2006 10:45:50 AM EDT

[#9]

jeet yet? (did you eat yet?)

no, joo? (no, did you?)

no, yawnta? (no, do you want to?)

aight. (alright)

Posted: 6/20/2006 10:51:40 AM EDT

[#10]

c m duks
m aint duks
o s a r duks
c m wangs?

Posted: 6/20/2006 11:00:12 AM EDT

[#11]

Werd

Posted: 6/20/2006 11:01:50 AM EDT

[#12]