|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26309
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| So, about Brandon Ingram.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90306
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 7:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lakers_Jester wrote: | | Omar Little wrote: | | tox wrote: | | Annihilator wrote: |
So, in the abstract--and not addressing any particular situation--since "should of," "shoulda," etc. are commonly used in conversation in place of "should have," we should not correct others when they make this mistake. I can agree with that. It was kind of my point all along. |
JMK said it well. I wouldn't complain about "shoulda" (I've used it myself), but "should of" isn't actually ever used in speech. It's just an incorrect transcription of "should've," hence the correction. |
You're just dealing with people whose primary linguistic input is aural, not written. So should've sounds like should of, you're sounds like your, their and they're sound like there, too sounds like to, and lose doesn't look like it sounds so they use loose. Dominant sounds close to dominate when spoken, so you see that a lot too, along with bias instead of biased. Millenials as a group aren't much for reading. |
The last sentence was uncalled for. |
Why? It's true. Their generation is much different in interacting with language in both style and form. They read less books than my generation. It wasn't a shot, it was an explanation of why the above errors get made, because they sound right.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KindCrippler2000
Franchise Player
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 15821
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144461
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 10:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Epic
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17876
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 11:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Omar Little wrote: | | tox wrote: | | Annihilator wrote: |
So, in the abstract--and not addressing any particular situation--since "should of," "shoulda," etc. are commonly used in conversation in place of "should have," we should not correct others when they make this mistake. I can agree with that. It was kind of my point all along. |
JMK said it well. I wouldn't complain about "shoulda" (I've used it myself), but "should of" isn't actually ever used in speech. It's just an incorrect transcription of "should've," hence the correction. |
You're just dealing with people whose primary linguistic input is aural, not written. So should've sounds like should of, you're sounds like your, their and they're sound like there, too sounds like to, and lose doesn't look like it sounds so they use loose. Dominant sounds close to dominate when spoken, so you see that a lot too, along with bias instead of biased. Millenials as a group aren't much for reading. |
Interesting point! You're probably right here, just based on what I know of my peers. I would add that a lot of what they do read are online posts (blogs, forums, reddit, social media), many of which likewise use the same ungrammatical language. Never thought of it that way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17876
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Anyways, cool link. Poor Ingram was probably getting annoyed at Rome's insistence on asking diet questions. Is it that hard to fathom how force feeding might be sickening? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
