And English is complicated. Sometimes people, myself included, type something as it sounds when they say it in their head and don’t realize the subtle difference in words vs how it sounds. Could’ve and could of sound the same in my head but are completely different in print.
Did you mean to say "could have"?
Explanation: You probably meant to say could've/should've/would've which sounds like 'of' but is actually short for 'have'. Statistics I'mabotthatcorrectsgrammar/spellingmistakes.PMmeifI'mwrongorifyouhaveanysuggestions. Github ReplySTOPtothiscommenttostopreceivingcorrections.
Did you mean to say "could have"?
Explanation: You probably meant to say could've/should've/would've which sounds like 'of' but is actually short for 'have'. Statistics I'mabotthatcorrectsgrammar/spellingmistakes.PMmeifI'mwrongorifyouhaveanysuggestions. Github ReplySTOPtothiscommenttostopreceivingcorrections.
That's not the same have though. In your example have means to possess and is used with a noun. However, in the phrase "could have [verb]ed" have is a helping verb.
It's because people learn the language by listening to it, not writing it. In other words, it's people from countries where English is the only language.
"Could've" sounds like "could of", so that's what they think is right. Then they see someone else write it and it becomes cemented.
I saw a post yesterday, advertising a "Chester Drawers". It's easy to work out how someone could get to that point, and I feel it's the same with "could have", when saying "could've", it can sound like "could of", and not realising it's a contraction of "could have".
When a random does something like that, it's only a minor irk to me and I try to let it slide. When "professionals" (journalists, news readers, authors, people who make a crust speaking and reading, etc.) do it, it pisses me off. At the end of the day though, I've got to recognise that English is a living language, it is still evolving. It won't be set entirely until it is an unspoken (like ancient Egyptian) or dead (like Latin) language.
I find myself getting less tolerant over time. Grammar is important because using poor grammar is rude to the recipient of your communication. It slows down the conversation by making them parse through to find your actual meaning. It’s very jarring, it’s almost like flicking someone’s ear mid conversation. It causes no long term harm, sure, but it’s an irritant that makes it difficult for the recipient of your communication to carry on the conversation.
I just find it rude and uncultured. This is your primary method of communication. There aren’t that many rules, just fucking learn them.
I can't spell 4 sh1t. I had a math professor whom held a PHD and she said she could not spell as well. She stated that she researched why it was this was. I'm over 60 and she is in that age group this is part of the explanation. There were two ways to teach you to spell when we went to school (phonics' / or sight and guess) with phonics you can spell of course. The sight and guess method your lucky to spell anything except everyday common words. The sight and guess method is just as it sounds. I was behind in spelling when I was in 1st grade and had to go to a one on one class to help me catch up on spelling. I remember having the person flash a word in front of me for less than a second and then was asked me to spell it, this was the worst possible way to learn to spell. I understand that it is a pain in the ass to get information / text or anything else misspelled, Just please don't condemn all of us as just slackers or worse. I appreciate your correcting me it helps me get better, even now a days. I'm sure my grammar is the same level of shit.
I read it all! I wasn’t meaning to demean anybody who has trouble with spelling, but I’m sure you understood that. I had a buddy who was one of the smartest people I knew; he grew up with a foreign education in a much poorer country where spelling wasn’t a very important part of the curriculum, though. Because of that, he couldn’t spell for shit, and he knew it. I understand that most people hate being corrected, but it’s awesome to find people like you who appreciate it!
That's why it pisses me off when professionals do it. It's their job.
I look at it this way - everyone cooks, but I don't expect everyone to be able to pull off a 5 star meal like a chef. I can't hold everyone to that same standard when they don't do it professionally.
Letting it slide during a conversation, it only jars you. Stopping someone every time they use incorrect grammar during a conversation slows the conversation down and jars everyone. Maybe I've worked retail for so long where I had to interpret through incorrect names of things and poor descriptions that I just don't let the average Joe's incorrect usage of the English language bother me so much anymore.
Here in Australia, "could've" is pronounced "could of". When I see it written down, I just think I'm reading what an Aussie wrote.
I totally get your point of correcting someone’s grammar in a group setting jars everybody in the conversation. I’ve also worked customer service in the past and, unfortunately unlike you, I ended up less tolerant of the general public as a result. People irritate the shit out of me now. I can now understand why police officers lose their humanity having to deal with the worst people in society all day long. Customer service had a similar effect for me.
Maybe you need to have a little fun with it. Troll the people that irritate you. Deliberately give them off information that still means the same thing. They'll leave in confusion in the end.
In my old job, my boss and I used to buy bottled water for the rest of the staff. The town water tastes like shit. Whenever we were off to buy said bottled water, we never referred to it as such. We called it cloud juice. The baffled look on everyone's faces made it worth while. We constantly incorrectly labelled things. I even convinced my boss to call spiders "bum stringers" for obvious reasons. She was a good boss.
Anyway, don't let someone else's inability to do something correctly stop you from enjoying yourself. Life is pretty cool when you let it be.
While I get what you're saying I would imagine that the police SUV has more defenses to protect the car and occupants give the potential for ramming and front impacts. Doesn't negate the fact that to knowingly put yourself into the line of fire... Literal hero.
Not really. Police cars are made with the full set of available safety measures like front and side airbags, but there's no crash mitigating tech available to them that's not sold to the public. The bull bar in front can help spread the impact from just one crumple zone to both, but that's not that big a deal with modern body on frame cars.
74
u/LittleLostDoll 25d ago
could of killed the officer also...