One of the ones that makes my skin crawl is when people use "of" instead of the contraction of "have." For example, "My plants died. I should of watered them before visiting my family for a week."

 

What are some of yours?

Views: 1353

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

why would any1 want 2 do that neway its not as if it helps nebody no wut ur saying <--- When I see things like this I just want to grrashbkljhlstabstabak;ljastrangledll;grrbbludgeonasdlbbbbb.

When people say "there's" instead of "there are" or even "there're". I know "there're" isn't a word, but it's damn sure better than saying "There's some people outside."

 

Also, "should've".

I think that can be put down to ease of pronunciation though, as opposed to people just not knowing the rules. It could be accent too, I know that I say there's instead of "there is" or "there has" and "there're". When you're talking at speed, things get jumbled together, but I agree that it's not something I'd expect to see written down.

How about getting "there" out of the construction entirely: "Some people are outside/out there"

 

Reminds me of the old slam on sleepy small towns: "I went there once but there was no there there."

I guess I'd grant some leniency in the interest of expediency, but where do you draw the line? It's so a shame that "there're" isn't a word. It has just as many syllables as "should've". Every time I hear somebody say "There's people" I literally think the words "There is people" and it... I picture myself doing Bruce Lee things to them in my head.

I guess it depends on how you think about it. I grew up with that, and a hell of a lot worse with me being from Yorkshire, so I don't really think about what it actually means at all; it's just another contraction, and that's about it.

But Bruce Lee things sound rather painful for everyone involved! 

I've been researching this Yorkshire place on the YouTube for the past 20 minutes (like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6V54g0314UA&feature=mfu_in_order... ) and I can definitely see the speed at which one speaks being a factor but it seems like 80% understandable. 80%'s not bad. It's actually kind of, endearing maybe? But I'm pretty sure I would Bruce Lee thing whole houses if I lived anywhere north of that.

Just watched that video, and it's spot on, although there is a lot of variation. I'd say I even speak a little bit faster than that, but I tend to tone it down a lot when I'm talking to anyone who doesn't know me that well.

The university that she was talking about, Huddersfield, is actually south of where I live, so I guess I'd be Bruce Lee'd into submission!

Noooooo...! And to think you'd be spared, if you would only,  slow,   down.

It's not even a concious thing though! There's no need for you to slow down if everyone can understand you anyway. It just takes time; my fiancé lives in PA and he couldn't understand a word when we first met, but I can witter away at my normal speed now and he has no problems, in fact, he starts picking it up himself after a while! 

Who says "there're" isn't a word? Contractions are done kind of on the fly anyway, especially in the interrogative. Why not allow constructions like "who're you?" or "what'd you say?" I see them as legally constructed expressions. The problem with "There's people outside" is that when you uncontract it, it's flat out wrong.

Precisely, we must advocate the widespread use of these words or our grandchildren will be fed to Morlocks.

RSS

Events

Blog Posts

It's all Greek to me

Posted by Simon Mathews on April 15, 2015 at 4:14am 18 Comments

Free at last

Posted by Belle Rose on April 15, 2015 at 1:00am 3 Comments

Services we love!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

© 2015   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service