the following do not exist "should of", "could of", "would of"

[activate]

the word you are stretching for is "have"

should have

could have

would have

'Is this a parental failure? A failure of the education system? What's the reason?'

Most of these are mistakes that can only be picked up in the written form as "could've" sounds like "could of" etc, so in that sense the onus is probably more on the school than the parents because that is where children usually get feedback on their written language competence. However, plenty of reading at home should make a difference too.

But is it really that pedantic to think that most people over the age of 5 8 should actually know how to spell and use these words correctly? I don't think so. Please don't get me started on apostrophes

Yes, worra. It should be.

That's the joke.

Errr, I think you missed my point, worraliberty!!

Its an internet forum ...you know ,for just random typing ,like having a conversation.Not an English exam or a job application

Oh

It's not unreasonable for adults to use the words 'of' and 'have' correctly. My pet peeve is people using 'loose' instead of 'lose'.

UsualSuspect, I don't know about you, but in real life when I have a conversation I use correct english - why should typing on a forum be any different?

I don't mind slang or net speak, but 'wrongness' really grinds my gears.

Pozzled, I don't agree that this is an example where language should be allowed to change over time. The reason is that it's part of a scheme:

I have gone out.
I could have gone out.
I should have gone out.
I might have gone out.

If you allow the 'have' to be 'of', as in

I could of gone out.

then what happens to 'I have gone out.' Surely you then have:

I of gone out.

In speech they do 'I could have' and 'I could of' do generally sound exactly the same, of course, so I don't think it has much to do with how your parents talk to you - maybe more to do with a lack of reading, and a lack of correction in children's own written work.

Who is Renniehorta? Because I may have to hump their leg for a little while.

That's the thing though usual. In my former life as a human, the amount of CVs that were presented to me by senior level media/PR people that were scattered with dreadful and silly typos, really was quite staggering. These were people who supposedly 'wrote' for a living, yet their spelling, grammar and punctuation suggested otherwise.

Oh, I see Renniehorta got there before me .

BOFPipPip I believe Renniehorta's already had a proposal....

rennie

The best way of understanding English grammar to study the grammar of another language. It enables you to view English from a distance and that distance gives you a new perspective. Then grammar makes sense.

If you translate into or out off English you have to really understand what you are translating. e.g. in Spanish there = allí, they're = son, their is su. They are completely different words, if you were to mix them up you would produce nonsense.

Because typing is not quite so easy as talking is it?

It is not pedantry.

I find it extremely sad that some people believe that grammar should be consigned to a dim little corner over there, somewhere.

I think its sadder to think you are oh so superior to some other posters

oh and it's not "I was sat.." if you mean "I was SITTING".

some people care, some don't

i can find more pressing things to be extremely sad about (thankfully)

I think it's very sad that some people would actually say 'would of' and 'could of' in real life. I am actually weeping about it. Or maybe I am just of'ing a laugh.

One of my good friends has dyslexia and she has excellent grammar - she is a primary school teacher! She gets really frustrated with bad grammar because she has to work extra hard at it!

Sorry, is this still 'IABU' or has it been renamed 'Patronise the peasants?'

Just wondering. Doesn't sound like an AIBU topic, more a 'you lot are thick'.