@0x4E4F@sh.itjust.works to linuxmemes@lemmy.worldEnglish • 5 days agoOh the humanity!sh.itjust.worksimagemessage-square33fedilinkarrow-up1699arrow-down111
arrow-up1688arrow-down1imageOh the humanity!sh.itjust.works@0x4E4F@sh.itjust.works to linuxmemes@lemmy.worldEnglish • 5 days agomessage-square33fedilink
minus-square@bitchkat@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglish7•5 days agoOr “would of”, “could of”, “should of”. Enunciate your words. “have” and “of” sound different.
minus-square@Molten_Moronlink5•4 days agoExcellent point, but “would’ve”, “could’ve”, and “should’ve” sound like “would of”, “could of”, and “should of”. So the problem doesn’t lie solely in enounciation.
minus-square@bitchkat@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglish0•4 days agoIf you think “of” and “have” (or it’s contraction) sound alike, you’re part of the problem. “Of” has a softer finish more like “ovf” than “ov”. The transition from ‘o’ to ‘f’ starts hard with a ‘v’ but finishes with a soft ‘f’.
minus-square@Molten_Moronlink1•edit-24 days agoShould’ve: “`shu̇-dəv” Of: “əv” Per Merriam-Webster they’re phonetically the same.
Or “would of”, “could of”, “should of”. Enunciate your words. “have” and “of” sound different.
Excellent point, but “would’ve”, “could’ve”, and “should’ve” sound like “would of”, “could of”, and “should of”.
So the problem doesn’t lie solely in enounciation.
If you think “of” and “have” (or it’s contraction) sound alike, you’re part of the problem. “Of” has a softer finish more like “ovf” than “ov”. The transition from ‘o’ to ‘f’ starts hard with a ‘v’ but finishes with a soft ‘f’.
Should’ve: “`shu̇-dəv”
Of: “əv”
Per Merriam-Webster they’re phonetically the same.