Why YSK?
The first person who typed “should of” probably heard of it in real life that was meant to be “should’ve”, they typed “should of” online and readers thought that it’s grammatically correct to say “should of” which is in fact wrong and it became widespread throughout the years on Reddit.
I hope something could start to change.
Duy’ou-ndarstend Diz?
Understanding written text is more difficult when the existing established conventions that impart meaning are ignored.
Sure, those conventions evolve over time, some errors are worse than others, and no one’s going to write perfectly all the time. But that doesn’t mean anything goes and the writer has no responsibility to write clearly and correctly.
Agree with you wholeheartedly
I perfectly understand “Duy’ou-ndarstend Diz?” but I really would not want to read this over and over again.
Of course, I don’t aim to change everyone, you do you. I just want to use the opportunity to say there is a difference between “should have” and “should of”.
I see your point, and in some way I agree myself. Language is always evolving, and the way English is spoken today is far off from what it was back in the day. And the way we use language tells a lot about a persons background and history. This is not something negative, this is personality and differences between people.
And it’s not someone’s job to change someone or everyone, but it should be accepted to correct when others are wrong. I for one like when people do this to me; I actually encourage my friends to do that to me. This is how I learn and develop my language, and should not be viewed as a negative. If I use language “wrong”, I at least want to be aware of it so I can correct it if I feel the need. I think this should of been how more peoples think it about 😋
It really depends on the context whether or not it’s appropriate to correct someone
Oh yes, 100%. Type of conversation and relationship between partisipants are important to consider. I just believe that the attitude that correcting someone is a negative thing is wrong. Sometimes it might be, like you say, depending on context, but not in general
*Have course
True. Just because “language is descriptive” (descriptivist will always let you know) doesn’t mean everyone can go freestyle with language, carelessly introducing ambiguity and miscommunication. They always say “as long as it gets the point across” but as a non-native but still pretty fluent, most of the time they don’t actually get the point across.
I use this same argument against people censoring swears. Not only is it pointless, but man is it annoying to read, too.