# you could of moved me to tears



## Diego Daniel Quispe

what does it mean? I have never seen the conjunction "of" followed by a verb in the past tense and with the conditional "could" before it, besides I cannot understand the meaning whole, I mean I've got an idea but do not know if it is correct, in fact I changed the lyrics to make sense of it to me, I used to sing "you couldn't move me to tears" which I would translate into spanish this way "No pudiste hacerme llorar/hacer que te tenga lastima"

This statement is part of the song "Somebody to love me" by Mark Ronson and featuring Boy George. The verse or the context is the following:

And I once left town, when the leaves turn brown,
With a couple of souvenirs,
She was in my car, when we hit that wall,
Yeah, you could of moved me to tears


I want to know what does it mean in english and maybe the translation of it into spanish as well. thanks in advance.





Read more: Mark Ronson - Somebody To Love Me Lyrics | MetroLyrics


----------



## Elixabete

You could have moved me... " Of" is short for "have" here ( the sound is the same, it is  common but still considered non standard)


----------



## Mr.Dent

Elixabete said:


> You could have moved me... " Of" is short for "have" here ( the sound is the same, it is  common but still considered non standard)


----------



## serena08

Elixabete is correct, it should be "could have." However, I wouldn't call this a short form. It is a fairly common mistake made by native speakers because, as Elixabete noted, they sound the same. It is grammatically incorrect.


----------



## chileno

Right. It is "could have" that's shortened to "could've" and people write it "could of" which is wrong.


----------



## Mr.Dent

Could of, should of, would of -- they are all incorrect.


----------



## aztlaniano

Podrías/podías haberme conmovido hasta hacerme llorar.


----------



## Diego Daniel Quispe

thank you all. that is true, the weak form of both "have" and "of" share the same phoneme /əv/,  I knew it in fact, but it didn't cross my mind that english speakers use "of" to say "have". I couln't have (/ˈkʊdntǝv/) made it out without help. thanks.


----------



## chileno

You must of thought of something else....


----------



## Diego Daniel Quispe

I did not pronounce it correctly, perhaps that is why I did not realise that they sound the same, although separately I knew how to pronunce each of 'em. I also run into difficulties when pronouncing "of", I'm supposed to say a "v" and not an "f", which is difficult to me sometimes especially when the first letter of a word next to "of" is a consonant, specially "T's" "ð sounds" "θ sounds" and a few other consonant sounds.


----------



## aztlaniano

Diego Daniel Quispe said:


> I did not pronounce it correctly, perhaps that is why I did not realise that they sound the same, although separately I knew how to pronunce each of 'em. I also run into difficulties when pronouncing "of", I'm supposed to say a "v" and not an "f", which is difficult to me sometimes especially when the first letter of a word next to "of" is a consonant, specially "T's" "ð sounds" "θ sounds" and a few other consonant sounds.


"Of", unlike "have",  is always, always pronounced əv, as you appear to aware əv.


----------



## serena08

Although in reality, both "have" and "of" often become merely "ə" in conversation. Hence the English expression, "coulda shoulda woulda."

Ex: I should've thought of that. = I shouldə thoughtə that.


----------



## Masood

aztlaniano said:


> "Of", unlike "have",  is always, always pronounced əv, as you appear to aware əv.


There are different ways to pronounce "of".
The weak form you already mentioned /əv/ and the strong form, /ɒv/ (BrE) or /ɑːv/ (AmE).


----------



## Masood

Elixabete said:


> You could have moved me... " Of" is short for "have" here ( the sound is the same, it is  common but still considered non standard)


Hi Elixabete,
The word "of" is not short for "have". I agree with @serena08 - it's just the wrong word completely.


----------



## simonitov

"of" is totally incorrect here.  It should be "'ve" - "you could've moved me to tears" which is "you could have moved me to tears" as all those above are stating.  "could of", "would of" and "should of" are not at all correct English. "of" is NOT short for "have" even though phonetically it may sound the same.


----------



## Elixabete

Masood said:


> Hi Elixabete,
> The word "of" is not short for "have". I agree with @serena08 - it's just the wrong word completely.


I ment it was acting as a shortened form of have (I wrote :" Of" is short for "have" here , meaning in this example) and very clearly stated it was non standard.


----------



## Masood

Elixabete said:


> I ment it was acting as a shortened form of have (I wrote :" Of" is short for "have" here , meaning in this example) and very clearly stated it was non standard.


I don't think "would of" can even be considered non-standard English.
The use of the word "of" here is incorrect.


----------



## Elixabete

Of course it is incorrect, what I ment by non standard is that it is not any ramdom mistake or a typo, as Serena said it is a fairly common mistake among some native speakers and you can find it in transcripts of songs etc. Anyway ,and for the record, my explanation was wrong " of " is not a shortened form of "have" and those who use it are making a mistake.


----------



## wiliam patrick

thanks


----------



## Masood

Elixabete said:


> Of course it is incorrect, what I ment by non standard is that it is not any ramdom mistake or a typo, as Serena said it is a fairly common mistake among some native speakers and you can find it in transcripts of songs etc. Anyway ,and for the record, my explanation was wrong " of " is not a shortened form of "have" and those who use it are making a mistake.


Te hago una pequeña corrección:_ ment -> meant_


----------



## Diego Daniel Quispe

Elixabete said:


> Of course it is incorrect, what I ment by non standard is that it is not any ramdom mistake or a typo, as Serena said it is a fairly common mistake among some native speakers and you can find it in transcripts of songs etc. Anyway ,and for the record, my explanation was wrong " of " is not a shortened form of "have" and those who use it are making a mistake.




It is hilarious my wanting to use it, isn't it? I consider it very stylish, perhaps because I like the song in which this particular way to replace "have" is. I just liked it and I'm willing to use it, would it be a good decision?


----------



## Mr.Dent

Diego Daniel Quispe said:


> It is hilarious my wanting to use it, isn't it? I consider it very stylish, perhaps because I like the song in which this particular way to replace "have" is. I just liked it and I'm willing to use it, would it be a good decision?


No. I can't think of any reason to use it.


----------



## Diego Daniel Quispe

Mr.Dent said:


> No. I can't think of any reason to use it.



My dear fellow, why?


----------



## Mr.Dent

There are some words or phrases in English which are incorrect but have certain stylistic or regional characteristics that can lend a certain charm to written or spoken English. In my opinion this is not one of them. The only intentional use I can think of is if you were writing a story and wanted to demonstrate the lack of education of the speaker.

As far as the lyrics of the song, "Somebody to love me" by Mark Ronson, the words "could of" are not in the song.
MARK RONSON LYRICS - Somebody To Love Me


----------



## chileno

Mr.Dent said:


> There are some words or phrases in English which are incorrect but have certain stylistic or regional characteristics that can lend a certain charm to written or spoken English. In my opinion this is not one of them. The only intentional use I can think of is if you were writing a story and wanted to demonstrate the lack of education of the speaker.
> 
> As far as the lyrics of the song, "Somebody to love me" by Mark Ronson, the words "could of" are not in the song.



And even if it were present in the lyrics, obviously it was be supposed to be "could've"


----------



## Diego Daniel Quispe

Mr.Dent said:


> There are some words or phrases in English which are incorrect but have certain stylistic or regional characteristics that can lend a certain charm to written or spoken English. In my opinion this is not one of them. The only intentional use I can think of is if you were writing a story and wanted to demonstrate the lack of education of the speaker.
> 
> As far as the lyrics of the song, "Somebody to love me" by Mark Ronson, the words "could of" are not in the song.




I know what you mean but I still like the idea of switching from "have" to "of", maybe I could use it in an informal facebook chat.
As far as the lyrics, I have seen contrasts between them, for instance in "A-Z lyrics" a sentence in a verse is " I could find lessons in *light*" whereas in "MetroLyrics" (Which version I prefer, and which contains the matter of this thread ( Could of)) it actually is " I could find lessons in *life*". So we cannot tell what is the actual lyrics of the song. But a question came to my mind and it is (if I am not keeping you) the following: if you say that using this word (of) as a replacement for "have" shows lack of education (I know you mean a person who haven't attended a school or maybe until primary school by this) Why did they in MetroLyrics use it? unless they wanted to ridicule themselves. I've got a possible answer but do not know if I'm right. I think it's because of the lyrics as a whole which depicts lads and lassies partying and doing foolish things as the teenagers they are and you can watch it in the videoclip of the song. I do not know. Well thanks in advance.

_Moderator's note
Unauthorized video link removed
Bevj_


----------



## Bevj

Many people who write song lyrics or transcribe them on sites such as the one you mention simply do not realize that 'could of' is incorrect because it is such a common mistake.  'Could've' and 'could of' sound basically identical in _speech_.  However in _writing_ I don't understand why anyone should want to make this mistake on purpose


----------



## Diego Daniel Quispe

oh! now I understand the idea, it is like in spanish when people could write or type "halla" instead of "haya" when the context requires the latter. In fact this is an example which bears an excellent parallelism with the mistake made by english speakers "could've" und "could of" because they also sound the same in speech but in writing _they have opossite meanings, though_ _the latter_ is not the case of the mistake in english because "could of" has any sense (or does it?) while "halla" und "haya" have both their own meanings.

Moreover some people make fun of others who make those mistakes in spanish because it hints a lack of class as well as the ones in english and try to avoid those mistakes because it can be embarrasing. In general secondary students (and obviously primary students as well does but we cannot lay any blame on them because they're just starting their lives) make those mistakes.

However what is rare in spanish is seeing those mistakes in web-pages, any article or stuff like that because they're supposed to be written more carefully. So I still don't understand why that "mistake" is on a lyrics page und anybody criticise on it. If that sort of mistake would be in the lyrics of a spanish song provided by "A" or "B" page, that page would be strongly criticised and would lose the rely that people have on it.


----------



## iEnrique

Diego Daniel Quispe said:


> oh! now I understand the idea, it is like in spanish when people could write or type "halla" instead of "haya" when the context requires the latter. In fact this is an example which bears an excellent parallelism with the mistake made by english speakers "could've" und "could of" because they also sound the same in speech but in writing _they have opossite meanings, though_ _the latter_ is not the case of the mistake in english because "could of" has any sense (or does it?) while "halla" und "haya" have both their own meanings.
> 
> Moreover some people make fun of others who make those mistakes in spanish because it hints a lack of class as well as the ones in english and try to avoid those mistakes because it can be embarrasing. In general secondary students (and obviously primary students as well does but we cannot lay any blame on them because they're just starting their lives) make those mistakes.
> 
> However what is rare in spanish is seeing those mistakes in web-pages, any article or stuff like that because they're supposed to be written more carefully. So I still don't understand why that "mistake" is on a lyrics page und anybody criticise on it. If that sort of mistake would be in the lyrics of a spanish song provided by "A" or "B" page, that page would be strongly criticised and would lose the rely that people have on it.



Now you definitely got the idea. In Spanish written words are pronounced the same when you speak because it's a phonetic language (with some exceptions as you said). When I speak to English people they usually make mistakes like saying "one" instead of "won" because both words sound the same way, however it's totally wrong as you clearly can see with this example:

"I one the contest and received a lot of money."

When you speak you erase that difference between words and you know what they mean because of the context, when you write too but in this last case you need to be aware that you're writing it in the wrong way and people will just see that you do not dominate the language.

By the way, in the past, Spanish people would make a difference between "ll" and "y" (some people still do it though) but now they sound the same and hence the errors of some people when writing.


----------



## Mr.Dent

Diego Daniel Quispe said:


> Why did they in MetroLyrics use it? unless they wanted to ridicule themselves.


I doubt that MetroLyrics or similar sites have grammar police. Users post their lyrics, and they are not edited by the site for spelling or grammar as far as I can tell.


----------



## Diego Daniel Quispe

Mr.Dent said:


> I doubt that MetroLyrics or similar sites have grammar police. Users post their lyrics, and they are not edited by the site for spelling or grammar as far as I can tell.



I did not know those kind of pages were also written by users, thanks, great fact. Now I understand the whole thing much better, though it is a bit unlikely, isn't? they are supposed to be grown old people, I think it is like in spanish errors I cannot understand why and how people make them. thanks you all for everything people.


----------



## iEnrique

Diego Daniel Quispe said:


> I did not know *that* kind of pages were also written by users, thanks, great fact. Now I understand the whole thing much better, though it is a bit unlikely, isn't *it*? *T*hey are supposed to be *adults*, I think it is like in *S*panish errors, I cannot understand why and how people make them. *Thank* you all for everything.


I understand that it's very difficult for you to see it because you speak a phonetic language and so do I, but you can't deny that when you were a child you didn't use to confuse "halla" with "haya" for example. Language teachers try to focus a lot on correcting that kind of errors from a young age within countries with Spanish as their mother language. The huge difference is that while Spanish people just have three o four exceptions, English native speakers need to deal with their whole dictionary trying not to confuse any single word with another word that sounds the same way while writing, and that's a very difficult task if you're not paying too much attention or you're writing/typing very fast (which is why it happens a lot when you're talking through whatever messaging app).

By the way, it's very common this kind of mistakes and a person who commits them is not seen as uneducated (unless you're writing in a very important place, like in a newspaper), you just need to avoid them. For you to recreate the exact same situation in Spanish, this would be as though someone forgot to put the "r" to "gracias" writing instead "gacias". You know perfectly well that that person knows perfectly well how to write "gracias" properly but he just made a silly mistake when typing/writing, and he can even be the most intelligent person in the world.

Finally, no, they are not supposed to be adults on sites like that, I can write the lyrics of a song and publish it there and I am not even eighteen years old.


----------



## Diego Daniel Quispe

I reckon the whole thing is already clarified, thank you a lot.


----------

