Never use could of. It is always could have. The same rule applies to should have and would have. It is never correct to say should of or would of.
Full Answer
Is 'could of' an accepted form of 'could have'?
It is only and always “could have.” When abbreviated it is “could’ve,” which has been incorrectly bastardized into “could of,” which technically makes no sense whatsoever. 40 views View upvotes Emily Nieves , studies at Freedom High School (2022) Answered 1 year ago It's "could have". "Could of" is not grammatically correct.
What's the difference between 'could' and 'could have'?
To summarize, 'can' is the present tense version of the word and 'could' is the past tense version of the word. 'Could' is also used when a condition must be fulfilled in order for the thing to happen. 'Can' is used when there is nothing that would stop the thing from happening.
Would have vs could have?
‘Would have’ shows a person’s desire to do something, but they could not, whereas ‘could have’ indicates that something was possible in the past, but it didn’t happen. ‘Would have’ is used as past tense action, whereas ‘could have’ is used to describe the past tense actions.
Should of, could of, would of?
‘Could of, should of, would of’ is a very good case in point. When I first read ‘I should of seen it coming’ instead of ‘I should’ve seen it coming’ I was convinced it was incorrect. After all, ‘of’ is a preposition (or rather, an adposition) and in ‘should’ve’ , the ‘ve’ is a contraction of ‘have’.
When did the verb "of" come into use?
The verb form of of begins to show up in print more often in the 19th century, generally when an author is attempting to replicate the speech of an uneducated person.
What does the amount of written evidence produced over more than two centuries mean?
The amount of written evidence produced over more than two centuries means that we are inclined to define a word, but it does not mean that we recommend that it be employed (unless, of course, it is for a desired effect). Our usage guide, the Merriam-Webster Dictionary of English Usage, addresses this matter in some detail and provides a stark assessment: “you had better avoid it in your own writing.”
Is "of" a preposition?
The answer (which is not a trick answer) is that of is usually a preposition, but also may function as a verb, typically when used as a substitution for have, as in ‘I could of written it correct, but wanted to see what you’d say if I didn’t.’ (Slightly longer pause while we wait for the reader to erupt with anger over this use, and over the fact that we enter this sense of of in our dictionary, and then again after reader cross-references several other dictionaries and finds that most of them also provide an entry for of as an auxiliary verb).
Is "of" a verb?
The verb sense of 'of' is in the dictionary, but not endorsed.
What does "could" mean in a sentence?
So if the word can represents the ability to do; ‘could’ represents past versions, of having done something, gained permission or made a request.
When to use "of"?
Of is used when expressing a relationship between two items, whether that be in mathematics or elsewhere.
Is "could" a verb?
Simply remember this, could is a helping verb and needs to be with another verb of which ‘have’ is. The word “of” is simply not a verb.
Is "could" a past tense?
‘Could’ is plainly the past tense of the modal verb ‘can’. A modal verb is something that expresses necessity or possibility. So according to the Oxford Dictionary, ‘can’ means: “be able to”.
What is the difference between "could of" and "could have"?
They certainly show differences between them. Could of is a wrong form of could have . This is the only difference between the two terms namely could have and could of. In other words, it can be said that there is not form called ‘could of’. It is nothing but an impure form of the word ‘could have’ when it is not pronounced properly. This is the only difference. Otherwise there is no such word at all for that matter.
Can you use "could have" in a sentence?
In both the sentences, you can find that the word ‘could have’ is used in the sense of possibility or probability. In the first sentence, you will get the idea that ‘he had the ability to pass the examination in the first attempt itself’, and in the second sentence, you will get the idea that ‘Francis has the ability to easily win the match’. This is an important observation to make when it comes to the usage of the word ‘could have’.
Is "could of" pronounced in English?
On the other hand, ‘could of’ is generally heard in spoken English. It is never found in written English. This is due to the fact that it is wrongly pronounced in spoken English. The original form of ‘could of’ is ‘could have’, but it is often heard as ‘could of’ when pronounced fast and unclearly. These are the primary differences between the two words in English language, namely, could of and could have.
What does "could have" mean?
If "could" implies possibility, then "could have" would imply the possibility of something that would have already happened.
Can you win if you worked hard?
You could win, if you worked hard. (Possibility)
What does "could have" mean?
1: Could have + past participle means that something was possible in the past, or you had the ability to do something in the past, but that you didn't do it. (See also modals of ability .)
What does "couldn't have" mean in the past?
Couldn't have + past participle means that something wasn't possible in the past, even if you had wanted to do it. I couldn't have arrived any earlier.
What does "you should have called me when you arrived" mean?
You should have called me when you arrived (= you didn't call me and I was worried. I wish that you had called me).
