# Couldn't of/couldn't have **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 15, 2020, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156 "2020-08-15T05:34:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/41 "2020-08-16T01:30:04Z")
> [@Hatchie](#): > > > [@GuanoLad](#): > > > > One I will never get past, though, is the misuse of possessive apostrophes after S words, when it’s supposed to be only after the plural S, not any word or name that ends with an S. It should be Chris’s, not Chris’. Argh! > > You might get past it if you realize that it’s not a settled matter. The AP Style guide prefers Chris’. Chicago Manual likes Chris’s. Personally I always do it AP way, but go ahead and Argh. > [https://www.thepunctuationguide.com/style.html](https://www.thepunctuationguide.com/style.html) Style guides are not what I go by. It’s more about how people say it. People say “Jesus’ name” a lot, but I never hear anyone refer to “Chris’ house”–it’s always “Chris’s house.” Or, to spell out the pronounciation, it’s often “JEE-zuss (or JEE-zuhzz) NAEM”, but always “KRISS-uhzz HOUSS.” I’ve never heard “KRISS HOUSS” or “KRISS HOUZZ” When it gets weird is that I’ve heard “KAN-diss HOUS” before, but writing "Candice’ " doesn’t really work. So I’m stuck writing “Candice’s” even when transcribing. But I can maybe write Markus’ house. It seems the main thing is whether or not the last syllable is accented. If it is, then you always get the extra syllable when making it possessive. But when it’s completely unaccented, the extra syllable is sometimes–but not always–left out. When not transcribing, I go with ‘s except with old fixed uses like "Jesus’ Name," because “Jesus’s name” “sounds” wrong to me. ---
**Author:** ![GuanoLad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guanolad/32/42_2.png) [@GuanoLad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuanoLad)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/42 "2020-08-16T01:33:32Z")
It used to be reserved _exclusively_ for Jesus. In a respectful nod, I figured, though maybe **BigT** is right and it’s all about syllabic repetition. ---
**Author:** ![needscoffee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/needscoffee/32/1076_2.png) [@needscoffee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/needscoffee)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/43 "2020-08-16T01:38:07Z")
> [@GuanoLad](#): > > It used to be reserved _exclusively_ for Jesus. In a respectful nod, I figured, though maybe **BigT** is right and it’s all about syllabic repetition As **BigT** states, that’s his own method, which I don’t think you’ll find anyplace else. ---
**Author:** ![Hatchie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hatchie/32/3983_2.png) [@Hatchie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hatchie)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/44 "2020-08-16T04:35:43Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Style guides are not what I go by. It’s more about how people say it. People say “Jesus’ name” a lot, but I never hear anyone refer to “Chris’ house”–it’s always “Chris’s house.” But “Chris’ house” is strictly about a spelling convention. The second s-sound is implied, and you say it the same way for either style - “Kriss-uhzz.” ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/45 "2020-08-16T05:03:32Z")
> [@duffer](#): > > The contraction of “could not have” is “couldn’t have.” Not “couldn’t of”. Sorry for a short rant but fuck I hate this. I couldn’t of said it better. ---
**Author:** ![duffer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duffer/32/1026_2.png) [@duffer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/duffer)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/46 "2020-08-16T05:11:33Z")
You little stinker. 😜😁 ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/47 "2020-08-16T13:27:15Z")
> [@RivkahChaya](#): > > Don’t get me started on loose/lose, or people who say “Loose the nut,” instead of “loosen” it. As long as we loose the hounds on those folks I’m happy. > [@eschereal](#): > > One of the most irritating misusages for me is “flaunt”. When someone uses “flout” correctly instead of “flaunt” incorrectly, I have to pause and verify that they did in fact use the right word. Agreed. Although nowadays a lot of people like to flaunt their acts of flouting. Which is probably driving some of the confusion / blending of the terms. > [@Andy\_L](#): > > I agree - that is annoying. Also “hone in” instead of “home in.” These are actually language errors (or changes) (things that people are saying wrong) as opposed to spelling errors/changes (“loose”/“lose”, “could’ve”/“could of”) Actually they’re all essentially the same process IMO. The public at large hears and speaks far more than they read or write. That’s always been true. What has changed is that prior to, say, 20 years ago very few people wrote much that had any audience reach. And those who did were professionals whose work was edited and proofread by professionals. So the misunderstandings and mis-hearings of the great mass of non-professional writers were never committed to text, much less broadcast to the world. The last 20 years have witnessed a vast democratization of who’s (whose? Gah!!) words are committed to text and read by the masses. I predict that in general homophones and homonyms will converge in spelling and/or meaning or be driven out of the language. Meanwhile spelling becomes less standardized and more phonetically folk-driven. As it was in the e.g. 1600s when everybody who could write (a small minority) chose their own spelling of many words. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/48 "2020-08-16T14:13:52Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > of who’s (whose? Gah!!) “who’s” = “who is” “whose” = that which belongs to who(m) (e.g., Baba O’Reiily) ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/49 "2020-08-16T15:12:46Z")
Meh. Yeah, it grinds on me a little, but I’ve seen hyperliterate people make this mistake. Same with its/it’s. I full well know the difference but when typing spontaneously one may come in place of the other. “Loose” for “lose,” though, really irks me. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/50 "2020-08-16T15:19:32Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > who’s (whose? Gah!!) whom’s ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/51 "2020-08-16T15:26:50Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > “Could of” in speech does not bother me; what bugs me is those who write “of” instead of “have”. Same here. It’s one that I’m constantly correcting in my college students’ essays. > [@Trinopus](#): > > I miss “whom,” which seems to have completely vanished from common English usage. Anymore. You know, I’m a bit of a stickler for decent grammar and usage, but “whom” is one that I would probably be happy to let go, mainly because so many people, even educated people, use it so badly. It seems, in some people’s writing, to be used not as an object pronoun but as a more formal or “educated” version of “who.” I’ve seen sentences in student essays like, “Wilson, whom was the president during World War I…” ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/52 "2020-08-16T15:48:37Z")
Thank you. I started with “whose”, but then realized I really needed a plural form of “whose” (whoses?). Then got derailed. Bob, who’s tall and bald, said … Bob, whose car is red, said … So far so easy. But Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice each separately write stuff. Some of the stuff from some of those people gets published. So … The group of people [insert word here] stuff got published. The group is a plural item, the stuff is possessed by only some members of the group, and the stuff is plural too. But the real point of the sentence is to differentiate between which group members got published, not their stuff that got published. I wrote > [@LSLGuy](#): > > The last 20 years have witnessed a vast democratization of who’s (whose? Gah!!) words are committed to text and read by the masses. Clearly the better move would been to restructure the sentence altogether. > [@k9bfriender](#): > > whom’s I know just enough about correctly using “whom” to think maybe you’re not pulling my leg. I know it sounds nice in my sentence. Not that my it-sounds-nice intuition is all that reliable. ---
**Author:** ![Powers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Powers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Powers)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/53 "2020-08-16T15:53:16Z")
“Whose” can be either plural or singular. It’s used in both situations. No need to restructure. Powers &8^] ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/54 "2020-08-16T17:30:21Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > > [@RivkahChaya](#): > > > > Don’t get me started on loose/lose, or people who say “Loose the nut,” instead of “loosen” it. > > As long as we loose the hounds on those folks I’m happy. That was exactly my first thought, but you beat me to it, curse you!! 😄 “Loose the nut!” is grammatically correct (if somewhat archaic) as a sort of battle cry in the defense of home and castle, akin to “release the hounds!”, if instead of hounds you keep a homicidal maniac in the dungeon for deployment in emergencies. > [@LSLGuy](#): > > Thank you. I started with “whose”, but then realized I really needed a plural form of “whose” (whoses?). Then got derailed. > > Bob, who’s tall and bald, said … > Bob, whose car is red, said … > So far so easy. > > But > Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice each separately write stuff. Some of the stuff from some of those people gets published. So … > > The group of people [insert word here] stuff got published. > > The group is a plural item, the stuff is possessed by only some members of the group, and the stuff is plural too. But the real point of the sentence is to differentiate between which group members got published, not their stuff that got published. Actually, your first distinction covers it. “Whose” is the appropriate word here. It’s quite happy to function as a plural possessive. More accurately, in terms of your intent that “the real point of the sentence is to differentiate between which group members got published, not their stuff that got published”, “whose” is technically used here as a plural determiner. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/55 "2020-08-16T18:26:19Z")
I made the mistake of using “who’s” for “whose” fairly recently. I got away with a gentle reminder that possessive pronouns don’t get apostrophe’s… ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/56 "2020-08-16T18:58:48Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > “release the hounds!”, Always, but _always_, heard voiced by Mr. Burns. 😉 Thanks for the education on “whose”. Who knew whose was so versatile. Not I. ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/57 "2020-08-16T20:13:35Z")
“Knock knock.” “Who’s there?” “To.” “To who?” “To whom!” ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/58 "2020-08-16T20:47:19Z")
> [@RivkahChaya](#): > > A preposition becoming an auxiliary very just doesn’t happen. How would you diagram that? “He could of gone there if he’d had a car.” If “of” part of the verb, or introducing a prepositional phrase. Can “of gone there” be a prepositional phrase? Language evolution is weird. The French express negation with the word for “step” (actually, in textbook French you use a negation that sounds like a normal IndoEuropean negation before the verb and the word for step after the noun - but people are dropping the “before verb” negation more and more these days). [Jespersen's Cycle - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jespersen%27s_Cycle) - having an preposition become a verb doesn’t sound much stranger… ---
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/59 "2020-08-16T21:11:54Z")
Wow. I typed that on the computer I just reinstalled the OS on, and it’s still got extra words in places, and missing words other places. Beginning to wonder whether I’m simply losing my mind. ---
**Author:** ![needscoffee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/needscoffee/32/1076_2.png) [@needscoffee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/needscoffee)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2020, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156/60 "2020-08-16T21:15:08Z")
Did you check your cat? 😀 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/couldnt-of-couldnt-have/918156.md?page=4)