Wat happened to the English language?
-
I have read books written over a hundred years ago that had no grammar or spelling errors. That is just good editing. I sometimes take a long time in responding to emails or online questiona in an attempt to avoid errors (unfortunately they still occur). The issue I am addressing now has to do with language, syntax/grammar. At first I thought the description of movies/shows (no matter how old) was because someone with English as a second language was writing it (part of the time). Then I started to see a trend, it was not just the people writing movies description, but people writing books and news articles. The most important one being news articles. These where obviously people who grew up with the language and simply do not understand it or are unwilling to put in the effort to do it correctly. With books (and news) I understand; you just start writing and let if flow, but the misspellings and grammar issues should be corrected before publishing. But it is reaching a ridiculous extent; are their employers just ignorant or just don't care (more likely they are just as ignorant or think we are). Sorry, that is my little rant. I just read a news article that was missing words (which required me to fill in the blanks) and also appeared to be incorrect (where's the editor?). And those responsible for verifying the validity of their statements. Technically; I do not speak English, I speak American, but expect people writing in that language to actually understand it or at least have someone editing (verifying) that what we writ makes sense. That's enough, I got carried away (2:59 AM), when I read something, I expect to understand without having to insert missing word, etc.. Have fun taring apart the above, as I had no editor and made now effort to correct mistakes, but I am also not publishing a (so called) professional article.
INTP "Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence." - Edsger Dijkstra "I have never been lost, but I will admit to being confused for several weeks. " - Daniel Boone
John R. Shaw wrote:
Wat
The same thing which happened to the title of your post.
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
it never could've worked.
Most native English (and American) speakers would've written "could of", and do not even understand why it's (i.e. 'it is') wrong.
They're, their, there, it's so simple :^) One thing I sometimes struggle with is "it's" instead of "its". For example: Sander's/Sanders book is awesome That's because in Dutch it's "Sander's" while in English it's "Sanders". However, when you say: Chris' website is awesome, you do use that apostrophe and it's the same as in Dutch. Sanders presidential campaign (that would be my presidential campaign) vs. Sanders' presidential campaign (Bernie's campaign). Or in Dutch, Sander's presidential campaign and Sanders' presidential campaign. It's not just an English phenomenon though. Dutch language skills are deteriorating as well. Especially the dreaded "dt" rule (singular second person is singular first person + T). "Ik vind" (I find) and "Hij vindt" (He finds). You see stuff like "Ik vindt" (horribly wrong) and "Hij vind" (less wrong, but still wrong). I must admit I sometimes do it wrong too and I still struggle with the past particle of some words (does it end with a D or a T?) :laugh: Hard to explain to a non-Dutch I guess ;) Let's just say I find such grammar errors in business emails, even the more formal ones.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
They're, their, there, it's so simple :^) One thing I sometimes struggle with is "it's" instead of "its". For example: Sander's/Sanders book is awesome That's because in Dutch it's "Sander's" while in English it's "Sanders". However, when you say: Chris' website is awesome, you do use that apostrophe and it's the same as in Dutch. Sanders presidential campaign (that would be my presidential campaign) vs. Sanders' presidential campaign (Bernie's campaign). Or in Dutch, Sander's presidential campaign and Sanders' presidential campaign. It's not just an English phenomenon though. Dutch language skills are deteriorating as well. Especially the dreaded "dt" rule (singular second person is singular first person + T). "Ik vind" (I find) and "Hij vindt" (He finds). You see stuff like "Ik vindt" (horribly wrong) and "Hij vind" (less wrong, but still wrong). I must admit I sometimes do it wrong too and I still struggle with the past particle of some words (does it end with a D or a T?) :laugh: Hard to explain to a non-Dutch I guess ;) Let's just say I find such grammar errors in business emails, even the more formal ones.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
Sander Rossel wrote:
That's because in Dutch it's "Sander's" while in English it's "Sanders".
No, the correct English usage is, "Sander's book"; which is a contraction of "Sander his book". The apostrophe tells us that some characters have been removed. When the word normally ends in an 's' (as in Bernie Sanders or Chris) then we just put the apostrophe and do not add the extra 's'; although, strictly speaking, we should.
Sander Rossel wrote:
Hard to explain to a non-Dutch I guess
But not to those of us who are fascinated with language and its (belonging to it, as his is belonging to him) usage.
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
That's because in Dutch it's "Sander's" while in English it's "Sanders".
No, the correct English usage is, "Sander's book"; which is a contraction of "Sander his book". The apostrophe tells us that some characters have been removed. When the word normally ends in an 's' (as in Bernie Sanders or Chris) then we just put the apostrophe and do not add the extra 's'; although, strictly speaking, we should.
Sander Rossel wrote:
Hard to explain to a non-Dutch I guess
But not to those of us who are fascinated with language and its (belonging to it, as his is belonging to him) usage.
Sander Rossel wrote:
One thing I sometimes struggle with is "it's" instead of "its".
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
No, the correct English usage is, "Sander's book"
I think I've proven my point :laugh:
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
its (belonging to it, as his is belonging to him) usage.
I guess that's where my struggle comes from X| So, Sander's book, Sanders' campaign, its effectiveness and it's hopeless.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
I have read books written over a hundred years ago that had no grammar or spelling errors. That is just good editing. I sometimes take a long time in responding to emails or online questiona in an attempt to avoid errors (unfortunately they still occur). The issue I am addressing now has to do with language, syntax/grammar. At first I thought the description of movies/shows (no matter how old) was because someone with English as a second language was writing it (part of the time). Then I started to see a trend, it was not just the people writing movies description, but people writing books and news articles. The most important one being news articles. These where obviously people who grew up with the language and simply do not understand it or are unwilling to put in the effort to do it correctly. With books (and news) I understand; you just start writing and let if flow, but the misspellings and grammar issues should be corrected before publishing. But it is reaching a ridiculous extent; are their employers just ignorant or just don't care (more likely they are just as ignorant or think we are). Sorry, that is my little rant. I just read a news article that was missing words (which required me to fill in the blanks) and also appeared to be incorrect (where's the editor?). And those responsible for verifying the validity of their statements. Technically; I do not speak English, I speak American, but expect people writing in that language to actually understand it or at least have someone editing (verifying) that what we writ makes sense. That's enough, I got carried away (2:59 AM), when I read something, I expect to understand without having to insert missing word, etc.. Have fun taring apart the above, as I had no editor and made now effort to correct mistakes, but I am also not publishing a (so called) professional article.
INTP "Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence." - Edsger Dijkstra "I have never been lost, but I will admit to being confused for several weeks. " - Daniel Boone
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
One thing I sometimes struggle with is "it's" instead of "its".
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
No, the correct English usage is, "Sander's book"
I think I've proven my point :laugh:
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
its (belonging to it, as his is belonging to him) usage.
I guess that's where my struggle comes from X| So, Sander's book, Sanders' campaign, its effectiveness and it's hopeless.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
Hate to brag*, but I'm a published author. Before I handed in a chapter to my editor I double checked if everything was correct. My editor barely made any corrections, and when he did make a suggestion it was often something weird like "maybe you can explain what 'x' is or maybe not, your call." At one point I got another editor and he read the already edited chapters as well, still no corrections. When my book was published and I got the physical copy I was proud. I opened my book on a random page and the first thing I noticed was a #@$&#!@^&^&! TYPO! :mad: :laugh: This was written and double checked by me, two editors, a technical editor and finally someone who does a final check on spelling and grammar. What I think is happening here is that everyone thinks the next person is going to fix it, but that person thinks the same. That sort of behavior happens everywhere. For example, the piles under my house were too short and my house started to sink into the ground (during construction, luckily). The piling(?) company, the construction company, local authorities, some overarching builders group, and I think three more parties looked at a plan to fix it and came to an agreement. The plan failed and in hindsight it never could've worked. Seven(!) parties did no do their job and an entire row of houses had to be demolished in order to get good piles into the ground (they went from 6 m to 21 m, so go figure). If that happens to a row of houses it could sure as hell happen to some book or article that may or may not be read. OK, I love it, but I'm obliged to say that if I don't want to sound like a douche ;p
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
To be fair, I doubt that any editor would "skip over" an error assuming a later editor would fix it. It's more likely that having skim read the proof and found it to be generally good that they don't bother with a proper proof-read. The other issue is that it's actually really hard to proof-read your own work. Of course you'll find many issues, but when reading it a lot of the time you're really just "re-playing" in your head what you intended to write, rather than reading the characters on the page. A service I provide is proof reading websites (including checking for consistent terminology, consistent capitalisation etc) and I frequently find errors which the authors are really embarrassed about, having read, re-read and read again looking for - and missing - typos. I'm aware that having set myself up as a "proof reader" I am very much at risk when making changes to my own website! This is quite a thread now and I'm wondering whether the OP really intended the typo in the subject line... (though I'm fairly sure that's a typing error rather than a language error, if it wasn't deliberate)
-
I have read books written over a hundred years ago that had no grammar or spelling errors. That is just good editing. I sometimes take a long time in responding to emails or online questiona in an attempt to avoid errors (unfortunately they still occur). The issue I am addressing now has to do with language, syntax/grammar. At first I thought the description of movies/shows (no matter how old) was because someone with English as a second language was writing it (part of the time). Then I started to see a trend, it was not just the people writing movies description, but people writing books and news articles. The most important one being news articles. These where obviously people who grew up with the language and simply do not understand it or are unwilling to put in the effort to do it correctly. With books (and news) I understand; you just start writing and let if flow, but the misspellings and grammar issues should be corrected before publishing. But it is reaching a ridiculous extent; are their employers just ignorant or just don't care (more likely they are just as ignorant or think we are). Sorry, that is my little rant. I just read a news article that was missing words (which required me to fill in the blanks) and also appeared to be incorrect (where's the editor?). And those responsible for verifying the validity of their statements. Technically; I do not speak English, I speak American, but expect people writing in that language to actually understand it or at least have someone editing (verifying) that what we writ makes sense. That's enough, I got carried away (2:59 AM), when I read something, I expect to understand without having to insert missing word, etc.. Have fun taring apart the above, as I had no editor and made now effort to correct mistakes, but I am also not publishing a (so called) professional article.
INTP "Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence." - Edsger Dijkstra "I have never been lost, but I will admit to being confused for several weeks. " - Daniel Boone
John R. Shaw wrote:
But it is reaching a ridiculous extent; are their employers just ignorant or just don't care (more likely they are just as ignorant or think we are).
In the day of grammar and spell checkers, it's unbelievable. Personally, I think it comes down to lack of education. BTW:
John R. Shaw wrote:
Have fun taring apart the above
"tearing" ;) taring: to adjust (a scale on which an empty container has been placed) so as to reduce the displayed weight to zero Also, some interesting definitions I didn't know about regarding "tare": a weed of grain fields especially of biblical times that is usually held to be the darnel
Latest Articles:
Abusing Extension Methods, Null Continuation, and Null Coalescence Operators -
Nothing really, it is just evolving over the course of time, 100% logical and inevitable. Whatever is attempted to retain how it is totally pointless as the juggernaut of change will crush anything in its path.
I don't think some things are evolution (like, specifically, "could of"). Evolution is a refinement, a honing, of something. The use of "could of" is an illogical regression in that it unnecessarily creates a new meaning for the word "of" that has no logical etymology other than "sounding a bit like" a contraction of another word. It breaks well-established rules about grammar, tense, verb forms and contractions. It makes the sense of a sentence harder, not easier, to understand. It's just foul and those who use it should be summarily put out of their misery. Not that I've got strong feelings about it of course. :laugh:
-
To be fair, I doubt that any editor would "skip over" an error assuming a later editor would fix it. It's more likely that having skim read the proof and found it to be generally good that they don't bother with a proper proof-read. The other issue is that it's actually really hard to proof-read your own work. Of course you'll find many issues, but when reading it a lot of the time you're really just "re-playing" in your head what you intended to write, rather than reading the characters on the page. A service I provide is proof reading websites (including checking for consistent terminology, consistent capitalisation etc) and I frequently find errors which the authors are really embarrassed about, having read, re-read and read again looking for - and missing - typos. I'm aware that having set myself up as a "proof reader" I am very much at risk when making changes to my own website! This is quite a thread now and I'm wondering whether the OP really intended the typo in the subject line... (though I'm fairly sure that's a typing error rather than a language error, if it wasn't deliberate)
DerekT-P wrote:
I doubt that any editor would "skip over" an error assuming a later editor would fix it. It's more likely that having skim read the proof and found it to be generally good that they don't bother with a proper proof-read.
Yeah, they won't ignore an error if they find it, but they won't do as much trouble finding it because someone else will (hopefully) do that already.
DerekT-P wrote:
checking for consistent terminology
This is so important and hard to do! I often find myself starting an article talking about, for examples, "releases", but when I continue the next day, or after lunch or whatever, I continue with "deployments". You won't even notice it when reading the entire work. It's also very important to stick to the terminology of the tools you're using. For example, Azure DevOps has "release pipelines", so call them that and not "deployment pipelines". Most editors probably wouldn't even notice, but for someone going through your article and looking for "deployment pipelines" it can be really confusing! Capitalization is also a thing. For example, when I first mention something, I often capitalize it. Example: "You will find Pipelines in the left-hand menu. This is where you can create and manage pipelines. So go to pipelines and you will see..." Or: "You will find 'Pipelines' in the left-hand menu. This is where you can create and manage pipelines. So go to 'Pipelines' and you will see..." Pipelines doesn't have to be capitalized, but when I'm talking about an actual caption on a button, I like to be very specific by using the exact capitalization the button uses, but that looks weird so I quote it too. "Click the 'Post Message' button at the bottom of the screen, this will post the message in The Lounge." Consistent writing is probably the hardest part about writing. One more thing that's really a bitch, British English vs. American English. The media I get to see, read, play and hear is mostly American, so it's capitalization and not capitalisation. Google will even mark the S as a typo :D As a non-native English speaker I really don't know which is what and I can be found writing the proper capitalization of different colours ;)
DerekT-P wrote:
the typo in the subject line
What typo? :^)
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com
-
Yes, the English language has no more secrets for I! :D
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
but I'm obliged to say that if I don't want to sound like a douche
That's not how it works. :-\
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
Yes it does. Check this out. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I think you're an idiot! Were you offended? No you were not. Because excusing yourself up front is like the secret super weapon that makes you get away with everything :D
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
Yes it does. Check this out. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I think you're an idiot! Were you offended? No you were not. Because excusing yourself up front is like the secret super weapon that makes you get away with everything :D
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
Sander Rossel wrote:
Were you offended? No you were not. Because excusing yourself up front is like the secret super weapon that makes you get away with everything
No I'm not offended. Because getting offended by a moron makes one of myself. :)
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
-
Professionalism is definitely diminishing. It doesn't seem like proofreading is a thing anymore. Also, things like swearing were not done in articles, but now it is. And some even include memes.
Jacquers wrote:
And some even include memes.
I think that's a good thing. Swearing can be a good thing, depending on the goal, tone and audience of the article. Like what if your article was a rant against bugs in Visual Studio? "Unfortunately, Visual Studio crashed again." Or: "And then that fucking piece of crap Visual Studio crashed AGAIN!" [Insert y u do dis meme here] Which of the two better conveys my utter frustration and anger with Visual Studio? :D The second one can also be used to keep the reader's attention, especially if the rest of the article is "decent". It's more a form of style than anything. It's pretty modern though. Old skool readers may stop right there and return to their physical newspaper, but that probably isn't your audience if you write like that.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
I agree with you completely. I've been a grammar and spelling nerd since birth pretty much. (My English teacher used to have me stand at front of class and would say "Tell them about apostrophes" or something, and disappear for a fag for 20 minutes). Partly, yes of course it's technology. TXT speak, predictive text and all the rest encourages laziness and re-inforces incorrect usage. Partly, of course, languages evolve and I have no real problem with the introduction of new words and the partial loss of others. What winds me up, though, is the use of words that are simply wrong and either give an incorrect message or an ambiguous one. I cannot understand how people routinely make statements that make no sense whatsoever - nor can I understand how people manage to correctly interpret it a lot of the time! One thing I've noticed is that people, now in their 60s, who used to speak correctly are now adopting the ridiculous use of "of" when they mean "have": "I could of broken lockdown". It makes no sense, it doesn't save any time, and I can't see how or why it arose. Maybe people have either damaged their hearing so much, or are just so lazy when listening to others, that they've mis-heard "could've" as "could of" and assumed that "of" has another meaning. When this started, I assumed it was just a pronunciation issue, but of course it rapidly spread into writing as well. Now we're bombarded online and on TV with ads for "Grammarly" - based on the supposition that grammar and spelling are "hard" and take so much effort that you need software to do it for you. However if people just applied some thought to the language they used, plus maybe learned a few simple rules, it should come pretty naturally. Misuse of language particularly irks me when used by the media (especially the BBC) - these are professional communicators, and part of their role (in my opinion) is not only to communicate effectively and accurately, but to act as a role model in communication. (I also get annoyed by full-time professional drivers, e.g. cabbies and lorry drivers, who make the most basic and annoying errors - such as middle-lane hogging and failing to indicate). Perhaps the root cause is the speed with which society moves these days; when replying to a letter, a response wasn't expected for a couple of days (remember when the postman called several times a day?) but with text and WhatsApp there is an expectation of instant reply to everything. We arguably write more than we ever have done, but have less time to do it
I don't know a lot of those words, but dandelion, fern and heron should be common enough :wtf: Also, isn't mistletoe a thing during Christmas? There's this song about it... Ron Weasley gets his father's car wrecked by a willow (the Weeping Willow) and doesn't the Headless Horseman come from the roots of a willow? Nectar is only one of the most important things in life! Without nectar we'd have no bees and other insects and without them we'd have no life on earth! :wtf: I think nectar was one of those words that was in my biology book when I was six or seven. I know ash only as ash from a fire, not a tree, I assume that meaning is still in the dictionary? I recently delivered some acorns from some nymphs to the leaders of their tribe so she could replant them and set the nymphs free :D Outside of that game I've never seen the word though :laugh: Buttercup is a Powerpuff Girl and I think also one of the Totally Spies girls. Cauliflower is just a vegetable that people here eat on regular basis :~ It's weird that I can think of plenty of uses for some of these words and I'm not even English, yet the English don't think it's necessary to learn these words? That said, people in the Netherlands are really bad with sayings, or expressions. Like, it's raining cats and dogs. My parents and grandparents know a lot more than me and I know a lot more than a lot of people from my generation. In fact, just last week I asked a friend who is an English teacher "what's English for [some expression in Dutch]" and she didn't even know the expression :wtf: On the other hand, we now have "doekoe" and "patta's", which is street language for "money" and "shoes", borrowed from Turkish or Moroccan or some such :~ You'll rarely hear anyone older than 25 use those words though and most don't even know them.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
Were you offended? No you were not. Because excusing yourself up front is like the secret super weapon that makes you get away with everything
No I'm not offended. Because getting offended by a moron makes one of myself. :)
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
Oi! You didn't excuse yourself up front and now you've gone and offended me! :|
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
Oi! You didn't excuse yourself up front and now you've gone and offended me! :|
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
Well, at least you don't think I'm a moron. :-D
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
-
Yes, the English language has no more secrets for I! :D
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
Sorry to barge in your conversation, but why would you care about the little apostrophe? It's dead, read the news: 'Laziness has won': apostrophe protection society admits its defeat | UK news | The Guardian[^]. In case you don't see it, there is sarcasm and tears all over my post; English is not my first language but I've learned to love it.
Mircea
-
I have read books written over a hundred years ago that had no grammar or spelling errors. That is just good editing. I sometimes take a long time in responding to emails or online questiona in an attempt to avoid errors (unfortunately they still occur). The issue I am addressing now has to do with language, syntax/grammar. At first I thought the description of movies/shows (no matter how old) was because someone with English as a second language was writing it (part of the time). Then I started to see a trend, it was not just the people writing movies description, but people writing books and news articles. The most important one being news articles. These where obviously people who grew up with the language and simply do not understand it or are unwilling to put in the effort to do it correctly. With books (and news) I understand; you just start writing and let if flow, but the misspellings and grammar issues should be corrected before publishing. But it is reaching a ridiculous extent; are their employers just ignorant or just don't care (more likely they are just as ignorant or think we are). Sorry, that is my little rant. I just read a news article that was missing words (which required me to fill in the blanks) and also appeared to be incorrect (where's the editor?). And those responsible for verifying the validity of their statements. Technically; I do not speak English, I speak American, but expect people writing in that language to actually understand it or at least have someone editing (verifying) that what we writ makes sense. That's enough, I got carried away (2:59 AM), when I read something, I expect to understand without having to insert missing word, etc.. Have fun taring apart the above, as I had no editor and made now effort to correct mistakes, but I am also not publishing a (so called) professional article.
INTP "Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence." - Edsger Dijkstra "I have never been lost, but I will admit to being confused for several weeks. " - Daniel Boone
I say it started with spellcheckers. People figured it's now its job to correct them. This is how people devolve. But then, Twitter happened, and the quest for instant news meant editors (and related researchers and fact-checkers) were out of a job. I get scoffed at when I say I hate using a device with an on-screen keyboard because they're so much more tedious to use than a real one, but then these same people go out of their way to use all sorts of shortcuts because spelling out words in full is...so much more tedious than on a real keyboard. Oh, and it's definitely not just English.
-
I agree with you completely. I've been a grammar and spelling nerd since birth pretty much. (My English teacher used to have me stand at front of class and would say "Tell them about apostrophes" or something, and disappear for a fag for 20 minutes). Partly, yes of course it's technology. TXT speak, predictive text and all the rest encourages laziness and re-inforces incorrect usage. Partly, of course, languages evolve and I have no real problem with the introduction of new words and the partial loss of others. What winds me up, though, is the use of words that are simply wrong and either give an incorrect message or an ambiguous one. I cannot understand how people routinely make statements that make no sense whatsoever - nor can I understand how people manage to correctly interpret it a lot of the time! One thing I've noticed is that people, now in their 60s, who used to speak correctly are now adopting the ridiculous use of "of" when they mean "have": "I could of broken lockdown". It makes no sense, it doesn't save any time, and I can't see how or why it arose. Maybe people have either damaged their hearing so much, or are just so lazy when listening to others, that they've mis-heard "could've" as "could of" and assumed that "of" has another meaning. When this started, I assumed it was just a pronunciation issue, but of course it rapidly spread into writing as well. Now we're bombarded online and on TV with ads for "Grammarly" - based on the supposition that grammar and spelling are "hard" and take so much effort that you need software to do it for you. However if people just applied some thought to the language they used, plus maybe learned a few simple rules, it should come pretty naturally. Misuse of language particularly irks me when used by the media (especially the BBC) - these are professional communicators, and part of their role (in my opinion) is not only to communicate effectively and accurately, but to act as a role model in communication. (I also get annoyed by full-time professional drivers, e.g. cabbies and lorry drivers, who make the most basic and annoying errors - such as middle-lane hogging and failing to indicate). Perhaps the root cause is the speed with which society moves these days; when replying to a letter, a response wasn't expected for a couple of days (remember when the postman called several times a day?) but with text and WhatsApp there is an expectation of instant reply to everything. We arguably write more than we ever have done, but have less time to do it
