The word "of" instead of "have"?

Why has the word "of" suddenly become so very popular?

People write:
"I would of ..." instead of "I would have".
"The pose may of worked" instead of "may have worked"
...

I just feel I find this "of" used more or less everywhere. Why?

I don't know about Sweden, but over here it's the failure of the educational system to teach proper English. They don't teach proper grammar anymore and many people feel it's not important, as long as they are getting their idea across. Drives me nuts.

I HATE this. It boils down to poor emphasis on a good education from an early age (I'm in the US). People pronounce it "should-of" so they assume that it's spelled out that way. They just can't connect that the contraction of "should" and "have" is what actually makes up "should've". It's irritating to no end.


ETA: Yes, what Wallace River said. I'm typing too slow today...

Yes, its the similar sound that comes out "Should've" , bringing almost an F sound to the end of Should. Try to do the V sound without getting even close to the F.

And to me yeah, all aberrations of the language are very silly. One I am guilty of? probly. I no longer type -for years now- the word PROBABLY, but rather just blurt or type "PROBLY". Then again, could just be me.

pwm2 wrote in post #16844380
Why has the word "of" suddenly become so very popular?

People write:
"I would of ..." instead of "I would have".

This mistake isn't new. We had drills on it in English classes when I was in school umpty-ump years ago. The common homonym errors were emphasized, too. So much time was spent on "could have" and "your/you're" and the others that I naively expected that all adults would get these things right. We all went to school, didn't we? We all took English? It was required.

I don't blame the educational system. I blame the students for failing to be educated. The teachers tried. Many people, apparently, process language auditorily rather than visually, and they don't connect a heard word with the way it looks in print. Maybe this comes of not trying to teach reading until age six.

One thing I find odd about homonym errors: when an error is made, the person writes the correct spelling of the wrong word. People confuse "break" and "brake," but they don't write "brayk" or "braic." Simple misspellings would show more randomness. Somehow the partner of the correct word is stored in their brains, spelled right, but they open the wrong drawer.

OhLook wrote in post #16844562
This mistake isn't new.

No, but it's just that I feel the frequency has increased a lot. And it's just as irritating as when people think they are writing an SMS to some close friend and write r, u, m8 etc.

I know I now and then makes one of these incorrect mappings. Not repeatedly but it does happen. Especially when there are English words that just happens to sound similar as a Swedish word - the brain just skips a step and I only notice it if I take my time to read what I have written.

pwm2 wrote in post #16844598
No, but it's just that I feel the frequency has increased a lot.

Reading on the Web has replaced so much of reading on paper that people see more bad writing, produced by bloggers, posters, and commenters, than they did when most of what was available to read came from trained writers and had passed under an editor's eyes. The errors aren't labeled as such. Each "should of" encourages an uncertain reader to think it's correct.

OhLook wrote in post #16844895
Reading on the Web has replaced so much of reading on paper that people see more bad writing, produced by bloggers, posters, and commenters, than they did when most of what was available to read came from trained writers and had passed under an editor's eyes. The errors aren't labeled as such. Each "should of" encourages an uncertain reader to think it's correct.

But it's on this specific site that I feel the number of occurrences have greatly increased the last year, as if it has suddenly become popular. It might, of course, be a couple of people here that has been more active. But I just feel that I very seldom saw it maybe three years ago.

We have become a speed oriented society, I think much of the use of improper terms stems from the fact that people are getting lazier. They want to do things fast, with the least amount of effort. Save a couple keystrokes here, save a couple there....

As the prior said to Brother Wordwright, "Write the rite right, Wright!"

This is the age of entitlement. People have a right to use improper English if they want to, especially in an informal setting. So be it. As an employer, I had a right to not hire such people, since I wouldn't want them representing the company in any manner, much less a professional one.

It doesn't take much effort to be in the "Would you like fries with that?" crowd. But even that is beyond the "Do you want fries with that?" crowd. And if you don't know the difference, guess which crowd you're in.

Although the above mentioned mistakes are annoying, at least I don't have to habla to understand what these people are trying to get across.

i should of staid off dis thred, boi...

Don't even get me started............

kacebelle wrote in post #16844405
ETA: Yes, what Wallace River said. I'm typing too slowLY today...

You should of used the adverbial form.

With each generation we take short cuts in language. One also has to remember English is a 'living' language, words/phrases come and go.

'Would of',, means the same as 'would have ' but is totally gramatically incorrect. 'I would have' is the third conditional. 'I would have been a great photographer if I had a better camera'. We also use 'would have ' for something we assumed could have happened in the past. Even imaginative situations in the past.'I would have been a brilliant artist if I had the talent.'

'Would of ' is the lazy way out. A little easier to pronounce than 'would have'.