Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Double Conjectures - Grammatically Correct or Not - You Decide?

Properly used, conjectures are spelled with apostrophes (couldn't, don't, etc.). With that, people talk in double conjecture terms, so why wouldn't it also be grammatically correct to use double conjecture punctuation (couldn't've - couldn't have - could not have, wouldn't've - wouldn't have - would not have, etc.)? I mean, it makes sense, right?

Update:

Thanks for the correction, I thought I had it wrong.

Update 2:

But I also think you missed the point of this one. I know the correct usage. This just a brain teaser kind of thing, food for thought, you know, that kind of thing.

Update 3:

That's odd, h_brida, because I rarely, if ever, have seen character dialogue spelled phonetically (could of, etc.). I dont know what you've been reading...

Update 4:

Actually, YmhSilky, people do say them. I say them, and if you've read the answers, allegra mentioned she does as well. I've personally heard other people say it as well. Not just 'na' but actually add the 've' sound.

7 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    I think "wouldn't've" is perfectly correct. It's just that it's very casual; you hear it much more in speech than writing. The only time you'd really need to use it is for a piece of literature or poetry with character dialogue in the "local color." Contractions of all kinds are too casual for academic and business writing, and a double contraction like "wouldn't've" would be just too weird for journalistic writing.

    Now that I think about it, I think I say "wouldn't've" all the time.

    Source(s): Former university newspaper copy editor for three years
  • 1 decade ago

    The usual usage when giving a character dialog is to use a phonetic spelling rather than a double contraction. It's usual even when it's not a contraction. I'm accustomed to seeing "would of" and "could of" and "might of" when there'd be sense in "would've" and "could've" and "might've".

    The spell checker here won't accept "there'd", "could've" and "might've" in the previous sentence. I've been irritated by this.

    The "could na", etc. is only natural in areas where Scottish is in the heritage. I could nay understand him. It's not a sloppy dropping of the t in not. There was ne'er a t in nay.

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    Jane: see my answer above. A double adverse in English could be grammatically superb!! it truly is as much as you. there is very lots of snobbery linked with "superb" grammar. an extremely humorous e book in this subject is: Grammar Snobs Are great great Meanies: A instruction manual to Language for exciting and Spite by ability of June Casagrande Get it from the library and luxuriate in.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Conjectures and contractions are two wholly different things. But in your example, "wouldn't've" makes sense, but it's gramatically incorrect -- because that's the rule.

  • No one actually says "wouldn't've", "shouldn't've", "couldn't've", or even "hadn't've". They are actually attempting to say "wouldn't have", "couldn't have", "shouldn't have" and yes, "hadn't have". It's just lazy speech, tacking the "na" at the end of the contraction, in place of the word 'have.' Our ears hear the 'na' replacement of 'have' sounding like the word 'of.'

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Rather than double contractions, look at them as two contractions: couldn't 've, shouldn't 've, can't 've.

    If you are writing something and want to show what someone's speech is like, you could do this. It would show their dialect or lack of education. Don't use it in your prose or you will show your own.

    .

  • 1 decade ago

    We pronounce it like "couldn't've, but it's not correct - couldn't have is correct. BTW, it's "contractions."

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.