Contractions: Are “I would’ve” and “I’d have” both equally permissible?
2
Instead of “I would have done something”, are both of these versions ok?
I would’ve done something.
I’d have done something.
orthography contractions register contraction-vs-full-form
edited Sep 23 '14 at 1:05
tchrist♦
108k28290463
asked Sep 22 '14 at 16:43
Hugo
162
add a comment |
2
Instead of “I would have done something”, are both of these versions ok?
I would’ve done something.
I’d have done something.
orthography contractions register contraction-vs-full-form
edited Sep 23 '14 at 1:05
tchrist♦
108k28290463
asked Sep 22 '14 at 16:43
Hugo
162
2
You can also do I'd've
– guifa
Sep 22 '14 at 17:08
1
Pretty much all the contractions of I would have are pronounced /'aydə/, same as Ida. Likewise /'yudə, 'hidə, 'ʃidə, 'widə, 'ðedə/. It would have comes out /'ɪtədə/, with both /t/ and /d/ reducible to a tap [ɾ] at will. You can see why English has difficulty with spelling contractions -- the orthography just doesn't have the resources necessary.
– John Lawler
Sep 22 '14 at 17:30
@JohnLawler interesting, I definitely have a /v/ with the double contraction unless I'm in my most informal register and even then saying it feels more like I'm making fun of pronunciations and doesn't come off that naturally. It's almost a syllabic /v/ but I definitely transfer the /d/ to the syllable, but I don't have a (to me anyways) perceptible vowel.
– guifa
Sep 22 '14 at 20:38
The point is that there are thousands of ways to modify the phonemes involved under fast speech rules, so worrying about one of two or three spelling conventions -- none of which cover everything -- is not worth the effort. If you don't want to worry about it, write it any way you want.
– John Lawler
Sep 22 '14 at 20:41
add a comment |
2
2
2
1
Instead of “I would have done something”, are both of these versions ok?
I would’ve done something.
I’d have done something.
orthography contractions register contraction-vs-full-form
edited Sep 23 '14 at 1:05
tchrist♦
108k28290463
asked Sep 22 '14 at 16:43
Hugo
162
Instead of “I would have done something”, are both of these versions ok?
I would’ve done something.
I’d have done something.
orthography contractions register contraction-vs-full-form
orthography contractions register contraction-vs-full-form
edited Sep 23 '14 at 1:05
tchrist♦
108k28290463
asked Sep 22 '14 at 16:43
Hugo
162
edited Sep 23 '14 at 1:05
tchrist♦
108k28290463
asked Sep 22 '14 at 16:43
Hugo
162
edited Sep 23 '14 at 1:05
tchrist♦
108k28290463
edited Sep 23 '14 at 1:05
tchrist♦
108k28290463
edited Sep 23 '14 at 1:05
tchrist♦
108k28290463
108k28290463
asked Sep 22 '14 at 16:43
Hugo
162
asked Sep 22 '14 at 16:43
Hugo
162
asked Sep 22 '14 at 16:43
Hugo
162
162
2
You can also do I'd've
– guifa
Sep 22 '14 at 17:08
1
Pretty much all the contractions of I would have are pronounced /'aydə/, same as Ida. Likewise /'yudə, 'hidə, 'ʃidə, 'widə, 'ðedə/. It would have comes out /'ɪtədə/, with both /t/ and /d/ reducible to a tap [ɾ] at will. You can see why English has difficulty with spelling contractions -- the orthography just doesn't have the resources necessary.
– John Lawler
Sep 22 '14 at 17:30
@JohnLawler interesting, I definitely have a /v/ with the double contraction unless I'm in my most informal register and even then saying it feels more like I'm making fun of pronunciations and doesn't come off that naturally. It's almost a syllabic /v/ but I definitely transfer the /d/ to the syllable, but I don't have a (to me anyways) perceptible vowel.
– guifa
Sep 22 '14 at 20:38
The point is that there are thousands of ways to modify the phonemes involved under fast speech rules, so worrying about one of two or three spelling conventions -- none of which cover everything -- is not worth the effort. If you don't want to worry about it, write it any way you want.
– John Lawler
Sep 22 '14 at 20:41
add a comment |
2
You can also do I'd've
– guifa
Sep 22 '14 at 17:08
1
Pretty much all the contractions of I would have are pronounced /'aydə/, same as Ida. Likewise /'yudə, 'hidə, 'ʃidə, 'widə, 'ðedə/. It would have comes out /'ɪtədə/, with both /t/ and /d/ reducible to a tap [ɾ] at will. You can see why English has difficulty with spelling contractions -- the orthography just doesn't have the resources necessary.
– John Lawler
Sep 22 '14 at 17:30
@JohnLawler interesting, I definitely have a /v/ with the double contraction unless I'm in my most informal register and even then saying it feels more like I'm making fun of pronunciations and doesn't come off that naturally. It's almost a syllabic /v/ but I definitely transfer the /d/ to the syllable, but I don't have a (to me anyways) perceptible vowel.
– guifa
Sep 22 '14 at 20:38
The point is that there are thousands of ways to modify the phonemes involved under fast speech rules, so worrying about one of two or three spelling conventions -- none of which cover everything -- is not worth the effort. If you don't want to worry about it, write it any way you want.
– John Lawler
Sep 22 '14 at 20:41
2
2
You can also do I'd've
– guifa
Sep 22 '14 at 17:08
You can also do I'd've
– guifa
Sep 22 '14 at 17:08
1
1
Pretty much all the contractions of I would have are pronounced /'aydə/, same as Ida. Likewise /'yudə, 'hidə, 'ʃidə, 'widə, 'ðedə/. It would have comes out /'ɪtədə/, with both /t/ and /d/ reducible to a tap [ɾ] at will. You can see why English has difficulty with spelling contractions -- the orthography just doesn't have the resources necessary.
– John Lawler
Sep 22 '14 at 17:30
Pretty much all the contractions of I would have are pronounced /'aydə/, same as Ida. Likewise /'yudə, 'hidə, 'ʃidə, 'widə, 'ðedə/. It would have comes out /'ɪtədə/, with both /t/ and /d/ reducible to a tap [ɾ] at will. You can see why English has difficulty with spelling contractions -- the orthography just doesn't have the resources necessary.
– John Lawler
Sep 22 '14 at 17:30
@JohnLawler interesting, I definitely have a /v/ with the double contraction unless I'm in my most informal register and even then saying it feels more like I'm making fun of pronunciations and doesn't come off that naturally. It's almost a syllabic /v/ but I definitely transfer the /d/ to the syllable, but I don't have a (to me anyways) perceptible vowel.
– guifa
Sep 22 '14 at 20:38
@JohnLawler interesting, I definitely have a /v/ with the double contraction unless I'm in my most informal register and even then saying it feels more like I'm making fun of pronunciations and doesn't come off that naturally. It's almost a syllabic /v/ but I definitely transfer the /d/ to the syllable, but I don't have a (to me anyways) perceptible vowel.
– guifa
Sep 22 '14 at 20:38
The point is that there are thousands of ways to modify the phonemes involved under fast speech rules, so worrying about one of two or three spelling conventions -- none of which cover everything -- is not worth the effort. If you don't want to worry about it, write it any way you want.
– John Lawler
Sep 22 '14 at 20:41
The point is that there are thousands of ways to modify the phonemes involved under fast speech rules, so worrying about one of two or three spelling conventions -- none of which cover everything -- is not worth the effort. If you don't want to worry about it, write it any way you want.
– John Lawler
Sep 22 '14 at 20:41
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
4
Grammatically speaking, all the three constructs are correct. The non-contracted first one is more formal. The choice between the other two can be made only by euphonic considerations, i.e. whichever sounds nicer or is easier to pronounce given the surrounding words.
The very colloquial I'd've is not unheard of either.
answered Sep 22 '14 at 16:46
Armen Ծիրունյան
12.9k1775131
1
First, I don’t know that I would call this a matter of being “grammatically speaking”; spelling is not part of grammar. In any event, I’d’ve is pretty much the most that anybody ever actually says without having their feet held to the fire, and as John Lawler observes, it quite often rhymes with Lida from the song Lida Rose. So it isn’t in any way “very colloquial” for someone to say I’d’ve; rather, it is perfectly normal, common, accepted, and nearly expected. What is not so expected is the orthography. But that changes nothing about what people actually say.
– tchrist♦
Sep 23 '14 at 1:10
@tchrist In Australia I'd've is unheard of except in British television. I've never heard an Australian native English speaker use both contractions at the same time. We almost always say I would've. That being said, I'd have is also incredibly uncommon, as it naturally tends to become I'd've; it's hard to clearly separate I'd from have unless have is stressed. "I'd have to say that, wouldn't I?" However, in my example I don't believe have can be contracted.
– CJ Dennis
Dec 6 '14 at 2:15
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f197693%2fcontractions-are-i-would-ve-and-i-d-have-both-equally-permissible%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
4
Grammatically speaking, all the three constructs are correct. The non-contracted first one is more formal. The choice between the other two can be made only by euphonic considerations, i.e. whichever sounds nicer or is easier to pronounce given the surrounding words.
The very colloquial I'd've is not unheard of either.
answered Sep 22 '14 at 16:46
Armen Ծիրունյան
12.9k1775131
1
First, I don’t know that I would call this a matter of being “grammatically speaking”; spelling is not part of grammar. In any event, I’d’ve is pretty much the most that anybody ever actually says without having their feet held to the fire, and as John Lawler observes, it quite often rhymes with Lida from the song Lida Rose. So it isn’t in any way “very colloquial” for someone to say I’d’ve; rather, it is perfectly normal, common, accepted, and nearly expected. What is not so expected is the orthography. But that changes nothing about what people actually say.
– tchrist♦
Sep 23 '14 at 1:10
@tchrist In Australia I'd've is unheard of except in British television. I've never heard an Australian native English speaker use both contractions at the same time. We almost always say I would've. That being said, I'd have is also incredibly uncommon, as it naturally tends to become I'd've; it's hard to clearly separate I'd from have unless have is stressed. "I'd have to say that, wouldn't I?" However, in my example I don't believe have can be contracted.
– CJ Dennis
Dec 6 '14 at 2:15
add a comment |
4
Grammatically speaking, all the three constructs are correct. The non-contracted first one is more formal. The choice between the other two can be made only by euphonic considerations, i.e. whichever sounds nicer or is easier to pronounce given the surrounding words.
The very colloquial I'd've is not unheard of either.
answered Sep 22 '14 at 16:46
Armen Ծիրունյան
12.9k1775131
1
First, I don’t know that I would call this a matter of being “grammatically speaking”; spelling is not part of grammar. In any event, I’d’ve is pretty much the most that anybody ever actually says without having their feet held to the fire, and as John Lawler observes, it quite often rhymes with Lida from the song Lida Rose. So it isn’t in any way “very colloquial” for someone to say I’d’ve; rather, it is perfectly normal, common, accepted, and nearly expected. What is not so expected is the orthography. But that changes nothing about what people actually say.
– tchrist♦
Sep 23 '14 at 1:10
@tchrist In Australia I'd've is unheard of except in British television. I've never heard an Australian native English speaker use both contractions at the same time. We almost always say I would've. That being said, I'd have is also incredibly uncommon, as it naturally tends to become I'd've; it's hard to clearly separate I'd from have unless have is stressed. "I'd have to say that, wouldn't I?" However, in my example I don't believe have can be contracted.
– CJ Dennis
Dec 6 '14 at 2:15
add a comment |
4
4
4
Grammatically speaking, all the three constructs are correct. The non-contracted first one is more formal. The choice between the other two can be made only by euphonic considerations, i.e. whichever sounds nicer or is easier to pronounce given the surrounding words.
The very colloquial I'd've is not unheard of either.
answered Sep 22 '14 at 16:46
Armen Ծիրունյան
12.9k1775131
Grammatically speaking, all the three constructs are correct. The non-contracted first one is more formal. The choice between the other two can be made only by euphonic considerations, i.e. whichever sounds nicer or is easier to pronounce given the surrounding words.
The very colloquial I'd've is not unheard of either.
answered Sep 22 '14 at 16:46
Armen Ծիրունյան
12.9k1775131
edited Sep 22 '14 at 16:57
answered Sep 22 '14 at 16:46
Armen Ծիրունյան
12.9k1775131
answered Sep 22 '14 at 16:46
Armen Ծիրունյան
12.9k1775131
answered Sep 22 '14 at 16:46
Armen Ծիրունյան
12.9k1775131
12.9k1775131
1
First, I don’t know that I would call this a matter of being “grammatically speaking”; spelling is not part of grammar. In any event, I’d’ve is pretty much the most that anybody ever actually says without having their feet held to the fire, and as John Lawler observes, it quite often rhymes with Lida from the song Lida Rose. So it isn’t in any way “very colloquial” for someone to say I’d’ve; rather, it is perfectly normal, common, accepted, and nearly expected. What is not so expected is the orthography. But that changes nothing about what people actually say.
– tchrist♦
Sep 23 '14 at 1:10
@tchrist In Australia I'd've is unheard of except in British television. I've never heard an Australian native English speaker use both contractions at the same time. We almost always say I would've. That being said, I'd have is also incredibly uncommon, as it naturally tends to become I'd've; it's hard to clearly separate I'd from have unless have is stressed. "I'd have to say that, wouldn't I?" However, in my example I don't believe have can be contracted.
– CJ Dennis
Dec 6 '14 at 2:15
add a comment |
1
First, I don’t know that I would call this a matter of being “grammatically speaking”; spelling is not part of grammar. In any event, I’d’ve is pretty much the most that anybody ever actually says without having their feet held to the fire, and as John Lawler observes, it quite often rhymes with Lida from the song Lida Rose. So it isn’t in any way “very colloquial” for someone to say I’d’ve; rather, it is perfectly normal, common, accepted, and nearly expected. What is not so expected is the orthography. But that changes nothing about what people actually say.
– tchrist♦
Sep 23 '14 at 1:10
@tchrist In Australia I'd've is unheard of except in British television. I've never heard an Australian native English speaker use both contractions at the same time. We almost always say I would've. That being said, I'd have is also incredibly uncommon, as it naturally tends to become I'd've; it's hard to clearly separate I'd from have unless have is stressed. "I'd have to say that, wouldn't I?" However, in my example I don't believe have can be contracted.
– CJ Dennis
Dec 6 '14 at 2:15
1
1
First, I don’t know that I would call this a matter of being “grammatically speaking”; spelling is not part of grammar. In any event, I’d’ve is pretty much the most that anybody ever actually says without having their feet held to the fire, and as John Lawler observes, it quite often rhymes with Lida from the song Lida Rose. So it isn’t in any way “very colloquial” for someone to say I’d’ve; rather, it is perfectly normal, common, accepted, and nearly expected. What is not so expected is the orthography. But that changes nothing about what people actually say.
– tchrist♦
Sep 23 '14 at 1:10
First, I don’t know that I would call this a matter of being “grammatically speaking”; spelling is not part of grammar. In any event, I’d’ve is pretty much the most that anybody ever actually says without having their feet held to the fire, and as John Lawler observes, it quite often rhymes with Lida from the song Lida Rose. So it isn’t in any way “very colloquial” for someone to say I’d’ve; rather, it is perfectly normal, common, accepted, and nearly expected. What is not so expected is the orthography. But that changes nothing about what people actually say.
– tchrist♦
Sep 23 '14 at 1:10
@tchrist In Australia I'd've is unheard of except in British television. I've never heard an Australian native English speaker use both contractions at the same time. We almost always say I would've. That being said, I'd have is also incredibly uncommon, as it naturally tends to become I'd've; it's hard to clearly separate I'd from have unless have is stressed. "I'd have to say that, wouldn't I?" However, in my example I don't believe have can be contracted.
– CJ Dennis
Dec 6 '14 at 2:15
@tchrist In Australia I'd've is unheard of except in British television. I've never heard an Australian native English speaker use both contractions at the same time. We almost always say I would've. That being said, I'd have is also incredibly uncommon, as it naturally tends to become I'd've; it's hard to clearly separate I'd from have unless have is stressed. "I'd have to say that, wouldn't I?" However, in my example I don't believe have can be contracted.
– CJ Dennis
Dec 6 '14 at 2:15
add a comment |
draft saved
draft discarded
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f197693%2fcontractions-are-i-would-ve-and-i-d-have-both-equally-permissible%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
You can also do I'd've
– guifa
Sep 22 '14 at 17:08
1
Pretty much all the contractions of I would have are pronounced /'aydə/, same as Ida. Likewise /'yudə, 'hidə, 'ʃidə, 'widə, 'ðedə/. It would have comes out /'ɪtədə/, with both /t/ and /d/ reducible to a tap [ɾ] at will. You can see why English has difficulty with spelling contractions -- the orthography just doesn't have the resources necessary.
– John Lawler
Sep 22 '14 at 17:30
@JohnLawler interesting, I definitely have a /v/ with the double contraction unless I'm in my most informal register and even then saying it feels more like I'm making fun of pronunciations and doesn't come off that naturally. It's almost a syllabic /v/ but I definitely transfer the /d/ to the syllable, but I don't have a (to me anyways) perceptible vowel.
– guifa
Sep 22 '14 at 20:38
The point is that there are thousands of ways to modify the phonemes involved under fast speech rules, so worrying about one of two or three spelling conventions -- none of which cover everything -- is not worth the effort. If you don't want to worry about it, write it any way you want.
– John Lawler
Sep 22 '14 at 20:41