Langwij

Here's an interesting thought from Stephen Fry. I'm not jumping on the Fry-bandwagon, but I think it brings up a few good points about language today. When I'm teaching students, I do sometimes complain about American spellings but it's usually just because I've got an American dictionary and it means I have to look the word up twice. I sometimes tease Americans about words like 'travelling' (which they spell with one 'l'), but I'm realising that it doesn't matter.  


One thing that has started to annoy me though, is how things like 'couldn't have' and 'wouldn't have' can't be written couldn't've and wouldn't've when that's how they're often pronounced. I know it looks stupid but it's much more natural to me (and many others) and the conversation teacher in me wants to teach it to students. Also the likes of 'I'd have' contracted to I'd've (eg. I'd've been better staying at home last night) or 'there are' to there're (eg. There're five dogs on the roof!). 


Wouldn't've was actually used in a third year junior high school text book here in Japan and I complained at the time (since it does look odd and could get students in trouble in tests etc.) but it's started to annoy me, now, that we shouldn't write it like that. Russell Brand is the only person I've seen having used that type of contraction in print and I don't really see why he shouldn't've.


Anyway, the video's a bit different to that topic, but still in the same ball park.