Contraction Confusion.

[Mark Odegard]

>From: Laurence Horn And then there's "If I'd've gone...", sometimes
>rendered "If I'd of gone", where (as we've discussed earlier) "If I'd have
>gone" (presumably representing "If I would have gone", not "If I had have
>gone") is frequent but not prescribed.

Some interesting things are going on with contractions. There are times when
I have to think twice to analyze some of them. "I'd" is "I had" but
"I'da/I'd've" is "I would have". I can very easily see how someone would
analyze 'shoulda' as 'should of' instead of 'should have' -- even educated
native speakers who really do know better. The process is probably much the
same as the one I experience with the spelling of the word 'surprise': I
*consistently* drop the r when I type it, and find I have to go back and fix
it.

With 'shoulda', there are moments when 'I shoulda have' almost leaks out. 'I
shoulda have' feels right, sounds right, and seemingly should be
grammatical, but nonetheless is 'wrong'. I 'should have have' is
ungrammatical.

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com