"of" for "have" in "would have" constructions

[Amy West]

You asked for it:

It is not just enough that they participated, but that without their
participation the group would not of been able to accomplish the task.

 From a Worcester State freshman.

Those smarties at MW have pegged it in C11: [2]of - verbal auxiliary.
Ety: by alteration.

---Amy West

>Date:    Thu, 29 Dec 2005 12:12:08 -0500
>From:    "Dennis R. Preston" <preston at MSU.EDU>
>Subject: Re: "of" for "have" in "would have" constructions
>
>Amy,
>
>Please send this goodie to me. I'm working on them. I've encountered
>even such delights as "I'd've would've gone if I were you,"
>admittedly more often in speech. I'm beginning to conclude that there
>is a verbal particle "of," but how it patterns and functions I'm not
>sure.
>
>Dennis