Roast Spello of the Day: comPLEment - not comPLIment

[Mutineer]

w***er Milera doesn't like this

w***er Swan never had much difficulty living up to it.

 

[Elite Crow]

w***er Milera doesn't like this

Do you struggle with it too? What has this World become?

 

[FR0GGY]

I think randem apostrophes’ is Vade’rs trigga.

 

[cleanhands]

Do you struggle with it too? What has this World become?

WaynesWorld

 

[Southerntakeover]

s**t thread, would not read again.

 

[On The Crouch]

[rant]

Ok, the general widespread misspelling on BigFooty is irritating.

Compliment is saying nice things about something.

Complement is something going together well with something else - what we usually mean on BF, I think.

[/rant]

I realise this thread is directed at me. I have corrected my post and yes I know the difference. I was in a hurry and “compliment” was the first word that predictive text threw up.

I think BF has bigger problems because the amount of times I see “should of” on here is astounding. That is by far worse than my error.

 

[GrommoT]

I realise this thread is directed at me. ...

No, wasn't directed at anyone in particular - just occurs a lot.


As for predictive text...

 

[DangerSloane]

Can you do discrete and discreet tomorrow please?

Screw that! Let's get back to basics.

They're / There / Their
Your / You're

 

[Brenton Davy]

Ah... another pebble in shoe thing.


Propa English:

Should have vs Should of
[ http://www.elearnenglishlanguage.com/blog/english-mistakes/should-have-vs-should-of/ ]

MISTAKES + DIFFICULTIES
Should have vs Should of


The phrase should have indicates a missed obligation or opportunity in the past. In informal speech, it is contracted to should’ve, not "should of."

You should have (should’ve) called me!
You should of called me!

I should have (should’ve) known you were lying.
I should of known you were lying.

Tom and Pauline are so selfish, they should have (should’ve) been there for you.
Tom and Pauline are so selfish, they should of been there for you.

Should have should never be written "should of." However, the latter does exist: when should is followed by an expression that begins with of.

You should, of course, compare prices.
Past: You should, of course, have compared prices.

He should, of his own will, do the right thing.
Past: He should, of his own will, have done the right thing.

The Bottom Line

The erroneous phrase "should of" likely came about from the very similar pronunciation of should’ve. Perhaps I should’ve mentioned this sooner.


Would Have or Would of?
[ https://www.grammarly.com/blog/would-of-could-of-should-of/ ]

Would Have or Would of?
Marko Ticak
BASICS
When spoken aloud, would of and its fellows should of and could of sound exactly like would’ve, could’ve and should’ve. But even if no one can tell the difference when you’re speaking, the mistake becomes obvious as soon as you write it down.

The Right Way to Spell Would of, Should of, and Could of

When people write would of, should of, could of, will of or might of, they are usually confusing the verb have with the preposition of. So would of is would have, could of is could have, should of is should have, will of is will have, and might of is might have:

I would of come earlier, but I got stuck at work.
He would have stayed if he’d known you were coming.
You should of called yesterday.
You should have finished your homework by now.


This common mistake is likely caused by the similar pronunciation of the words ofand have, especially when have is contracted, as in should’ve. This mistake also happens with the negations of modal verbs:

Stella couldn’t of known she was going to win the lottery.
John couldn’t have come any earlier.

Thank you for saving me the trouble of typing this explanation

 

[Bovo]

Do we really need a grammar police thread on a footy forum? Is this really how far Into to the depths of anarchy we have come?

it Look past people’s writing skills, and take note of what they are trying to say. I personally prefer silly grammar mistakes than the pompous style which often infiltrates our threads.

Keep it real

 

[1970crow]

I realise this thread is directed at me. I have corrected my post and yes I know the difference. I was in a hurry and “compliment” was the first word that predictive text threw up.

I think BF has bigger problems because the amount of times I see “should of” on here is astounding. That is by far worse than my error.

my iPhone will change a correct ‘we’re’ to ‘we’re’. I don’t proofread prior to hitting post and used to correct it when I noticed it as I caught up to the recent posts. Can’t be bothered now, who of import gives a s**t.

 

[1970crow]

my iPhone will change a correct ‘we’re’ to ‘we’re’. I don’t proofread prior to hitting post and used to correct it when I noticed it as I caught up to the recent posts. Can’t be bothered now, who of import gives a s**t.

******* thing, I actually checked that and it was still correct after I hit the ‘. It must change after I hit space.

 

[GrommoT]

Do we really need a grammar police thread on a footy forum? Is this really how far Into to the depths of anarchy we have come?

it Look past people’s writing skills, and take note of what they are trying to say. I personally prefer silly grammar mistakes than the pompous style which often infiltrates our threads.

Keep it real

I also generally go with the flow with whatever poster's writing habits are like (don't really like to correct anyone in particular).

This thread is more of a putting a soapbox in a forest for the inner grammar police to have an occasional rant and rave with.

 

[jenny61_99]

Don't be a looser

THIS ONE! THIS one pisses me off almost more than "would of". The only thing that's looser, is your pants after you've been on a diet. ******* loser.

 

[Bovo]

THIS ONE! THIS one pisses me off almost more than "would of". The only thing that's looser, is your pants after you've been on a diet. ******* loser.

Not you to!

bahahahahaha

 

[footy4ever]

Ah... another pebble in shoe thing.


Propa English:

Should have vs Should of
[ http://www.elearnenglishlanguage.com/blog/english-mistakes/should-have-vs-should-of/ ]

MISTAKES + DIFFICULTIES
Should have vs Should of


The phrase should have indicates a missed obligation or opportunity in the past. In informal speech, it is contracted to should’ve, not "should of."

You should have (should’ve) called me!
You should of called me!

I should have (should’ve) known you were lying.
I should of known you were lying.

Tom and Pauline are so selfish, they should have (should’ve) been there for you.
Tom and Pauline are so selfish, they should of been there for you.

Should have should never be written "should of." However, the latter does exist: when should is followed by an expression that begins with of.

You should, of course, compare prices.
Past: You should, of course, have compared prices.

He should, of his own will, do the right thing.
Past: He should, of his own will, have done the right thing.

The Bottom Line

The erroneous phrase "should of" likely came about from the very similar pronunciation of should’ve. Perhaps I should’ve mentioned this sooner.


Would Have or Would of?
[ https://www.grammarly.com/blog/would-of-could-of-should-of/ ]

Would Have or Would of?
Marko Ticak
BASICS
When spoken aloud, would of and its fellows should of and could of sound exactly like would’ve, could’ve and should’ve. But even if no one can tell the difference when you’re speaking, the mistake becomes obvious as soon as you write it down.

The Right Way to Spell Would of, Should of, and Could of

When people write would of, should of, could of, will of or might of, they are usually confusing the verb have with the preposition of. So would of is would have, could of is could have, should of is should have, will of is will have, and might of is might have:

I would of come earlier, but I got stuck at work.
He would have stayed if he’d known you were coming.
You should of called yesterday.
You should have finished your homework by now.


This common mistake is likely caused by the similar pronunciation of the words ofand have, especially when have is contracted, as in should’ve. This mistake also happens with the negations of modal verbs:

Stella couldn’t of known she was going to win the lottery.
John couldn’t have come any earlier.

To me it's actually worse then getting than and then all arse up.

 

[cleanhands]

THIS ONE! THIS one pisses me off almost more than "would of". The only thing that's looser, is your pants after you've been on a diet. ******* loser.

I’m takin Rowies line I’m dyslexic

 

[cleanhands]

Do we really need a grammar police thread on a footy forum? Is this really how far Into to the depths of anarchy we have come?

it Look past people’s writing skills, and take note of what they are trying to say. I personally prefer silly grammar mistakes than the pompous style which often infiltrates our threads.

Keep it real

I’m wif ya Bovo if it’s gets that serious I’m outa here

 

[Bring back Bas]

s**t thread, would not read again.

You shouldn't of posted in it if you don't like it.

 

[Crow_Magnon]

principal vs principle, 'one foul swoop' vs 'one fell swoop', accept vs except, affect and effect, 'risk adverse' vs 'risk averse'....we're (where?) becoming a nation of nufties!

 

[GrommoT]

principal vs principle, 'one foul swoop' vs 'one fell swoop', accept vs except, affect and effect, 'risk adverse' vs 'risk averse'....we're (where?) becoming a nation of nufties!

 

[dogs105]

To me it's actually worse then getting than and then all arse up.

His not wrong

 

[Bovo]

 

[Apsaalooke]

I hate loosing games, it’s much better to win than loose

It's a mute point

 

[Sanders]

It's a mute point

touche