# Is "should've" a proper contraction?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [April 22, 2009, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917 "2009-04-22T00:05:29Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/1 "2009-04-22T00:05:29Z")
It’s not recognized by Firefox’s spellcheck. It’s not listed in any [dictionary.com](http://dictionary.com) dictionary. But for the life of me, I can’t see why it shouldn’t be. Can anyone enlighten?
---
### Author:  [@Sunspace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunspace)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/2 "2009-04-22T00:07:21Z")
Doesn’t seem unusual to me, although it was flagged by Firefox.
---
### Author:  [@Indistinguishable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Indistinguishable)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/3 "2009-04-22T00:27:13Z")
Yes, it’s totally proper.
[dictionary.com](http://dictionary.com) doesn’t list many regular contractions (e.g., you won’t find “would’ve” or “could’ve” either. And the latter, Firefox flags as well. Firefox’s spellcheck dictionary isn’t in any sense exhaustive)
---
### Author:  [@troub](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/troub)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/4 "2009-04-22T01:22:25Z")
Much better than “should of” in any case 🙂
Which spell checkers of course have no problem with.
---
### Author:  [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/5 "2009-04-22T02:03:59Z")
I would call it “proper colloquial,” as opposed to “proper highfalutin.”
---
### Author:  [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/6 "2009-04-22T02:08:08Z")
I wouldn’t’ve gotten my knickers in a twist about it.
---
### Author:  [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/7 "2009-04-22T02:13:25Z")
And to think that I constantly use contractions such as “I’d’ve” without blinking an eye.
---
### Author:  [@CaveMike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CaveMike)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/8 "2009-04-22T02:14:22Z")
[Wiktionary](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:English_contractions) includes it in their list of contractions. I wouldn’t consider the page authoritative, but it is interesting none the less; particularly for the entries of double and triple contractions.
---
### Author:  [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/9 "2009-04-22T04:19:43Z")
Yup. You mustn’t be shy about using it. Oughtn’t you?
---
### Author:  [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/10 "2009-04-22T05:03:58Z")
> [@Leaper](#):
>
> It’s not recognized by Firefox’s spellcheck.
Huh, I wouldn’t’ve thought so.
---
### Author:  [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/11 "2009-04-22T05:06:07Z")
> [@Leaper](#):
>
> It’s not recognized by Firefox’s spellcheck.
Huh. It shoulda.
---
### Author:  [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/12 "2009-04-22T06:43:35Z")
What is a “proper contraction” anyways?
---
### Author:  [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 6:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/13 "2009-04-22T06:52:06Z")
It’s as opposed to a Braxton-Hicks.
---
### Author:  [@Khadaji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khadaji)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 9:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/14 "2009-04-22T09:43:48Z")
Many contractions are flagged by Firefox on my machine.
---
### Author:  [@Keeve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Keeve)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 10:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/15 "2009-04-22T10:47:25Z")
> [@Balthisar](#):
>
> And to think that I constantly use contractions such as “I’d’ve” without blinking an eye.
Do you use it in writing, or only in speech?
It never occurs to me to use “I’d’ve” in writing. I wrote “I’d have”. I do speak it a lot, but I consider it to be a slurring, not a contraction.
---
### Author:  [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/16 "2009-04-22T12:32:58Z")
> [@troub](#):
>
> Much better than “should of” in any case 🙂
_ **Thank** _ you. God, I have so few grammatical pet peeves, but this one is by far the biggest.
> [@](#):
>
> Which spell checkers of course have no problem with.
I weep for humanity.
---
### Author:  [@An\_Gadai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/An_Gadai)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/17 "2009-04-22T12:51:10Z")
I amn’t the only one who uses it then?
---
### Author:  [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/18 "2009-04-22T13:38:26Z")
Whaddya talkin’ about?
---
### Author:  [@Philster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Philster)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/19 "2009-04-22T13:57:23Z")
That’s a whole nother issue. Besides, ‘‘it’s’’ is a contraction and not a possessive. Didya know that? Many don’t.
Damn, I could’ve had a V-8. Where’s the Beef?
---
### Author:  [@Mudz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mudz)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2009, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917/20 "2009-04-22T14:10:12Z")
> [@An\_Gadai](#):
>
> I amn’t the only one who uses it then?
My kids use “amn’t.” They came up with it themselves. Which makes me wonder why this isn’t proper. Why is “aren’t” proper, but “amn’t” not? It fits the pattern: isn’t, aren’t, amn’t.
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-shouldve-a-proper-contraction/493917.md?page=2)