In favor of "wouldn't of": An author of 40 books, at least 2.5% of which have introductions by Newt Gingrich. He also needs to work.

Against "wouldn't of": Basically everyone else?

I hate when you ask someone "how are you?" and they respond with "I am well" when they're clearly not referring to their health. You also get the feeling that this person truly believes they are speaking intelligently. Makes me cringe.

What's wrong with that? It's a social formula, you're meant to say that you're well , regardless of how you actually are. The questioner didn't really care either, it was just a greeting.

"Well" is an adverb which shouldn't follow the linking verb. It's correct to say "I am good."

It's also an adjective. There's nothing wrong with saying you are well.

On that note, a real tilting issue I have with this is when Spanish people use it as an adverb when it should be the adjectival use.

For example: "hi Juan, how's it going?"

Juan: "well"

Me: "**** you juan you stupid ****ing **** I've told you a million times how to use well. Do you ever listen to a ****ing word I say you prick?"

I really don't see it as being an issue of for or against. There just aren't any grounds in favour other than some spastics use it. It's like saying ok well is it perogative or prerogative? Is it pacific or specific? We just need to accept that the people who use perogative and pacific are complete mongos. It can't ever be accepted that said mongos are correct.

No, the hyphenated phrases in this lawsuit aren't LAWSUIT-NORMAL-WORDING-PHRASES.

I'm pretty sure there's a "grammar nazi" joke somewhere in there.

That's what I used to think about "between you and me" vs. "between you and I," until I heard the Lexicon Valley podcast.

I had originally thought that "between you and I" was a ******ed hypercorrection, and always wrong because of the rule regarding objects of the prepositional phrase.

But the podcast starts bringing up Shakespeare and some obscure scholars from the '50s and **** and makes a case that there's a school of linguists who will argue in favor of "between you and I."

**** them, I say. I'm a die-hard "between you and me"er and anyone else can bite me.

Uh, wut?

"How's it going?" "[It's going] well."

The problem is... ?

You're the second person to mention this completely irrelevant fact, like you think your political opinion or his has any bearing on grammar. It's an ignorant association to make.

At any rate, like the author, Gingrich is also a Ph.D, but it's doubtful he had anything to do with the author's text.

Well, it's like this: if you simply reply 'well' (especially with a slightly rising intonation), it doesn't sound like you're saying you are well. Rather, it makes me think you're going to continue speaking, perhaps to tell me why things are good or bad. If you do mean to answer with a one word 'well', don't you think it's a little short and rude?

So, as a linking adverb, it doesn't mean 'I'm well'.

After correcting a guy a few times, then being more explicit with an explanation on the board with practice of the correct intonation, I tend to get a bit pmt about the whole thing. After that I give up and resign myself to the fact I'm dealing with another mongo.

A pretty huge dick?

I would think it would be singular if you're talking about the concept of compound returns, but if you're talking about the actual returns it would be plural.

I looked up compound returns and I think it's always plural. The concept is 'compound return'

I could be wrong but it seems like that.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/compoundreturn.asp

No, it doesn't mean "I'm well"; afaic when it's a response to "how's it going" it absolutely does mean what I said above: "[it's going] well." Your implicitly proposed answer, "good", requires interpreting one question — "how's it going" — as a moderately different one — "how are you" — and though you can argue that custom makes this reinterpretation normal, it's certainly not required. (The slightly rising intonation complicates it a bit but there's no interpretation that really matches that so I don't know how to interpret it.)

Disclaimer of sorts: That (without the improper intonation) is how I answer this question, too (and I'm a highly educated native English speaker who, as you can see from this thread, is quite a stickler about grammar). I think a one-word "good" to the question "how's it going" is inarticulate and smacks of a lack of education; yes, I realize that to some extent it's idiomatic and so I won't draw a strong inference from its use, but I certainly won't infer anything negative from the fact that someone chooses to answer the question grammatically correctly.

Bottom line: According to you you're trying to "teach" this non-native speaker something that's grammatically incorrect and that is not so universally accepted as an idiom that the correct version is unacceptable. And then when he persists in answering grammatically correctly, rather than with the sloppy idiom you've been advocating, your conclusion is that he's "another mongo", when I think it's your position that is the weaker. You might want to reexamine it.


(Btw, no, not only is his answer not wrong, but I don't think it's at all rude.)


Edit: See below.

^ Rereading, I think I may have missed your point: I think maybe your only problem is with the inflection. If that's true, then OK, you have a point, but it's a pretty minor one.

I get bothered by inflection in one particular case more than any other: When people are reading (almost always) a comma-separated list and their emphasis and inflection of the first item in the list implies that they're at the end of the sentence. For example, you'll hear something like "I went to the store and bought apples [descending inflection, followed by a pause] ... bananas, and pears." What surprises me most about this one is how often you'll hear it in commercial advertisements, even those that are pre-recorded so there's no excuse for it.

People are mentioning the foreword by Gingrich as evidence of his judgment. I think it's reasonable.

Sorry, I sent you off on a tangent. I didn't mean to confuse 'how's it going' and 'how are you'; in both cases it's common to hear a one word 'well' reply. Whatever variation of the greeting you ask, it's common. The problem lies in their mind translating 'bien' as 'well', and answering in the way they do in Spanish.

I opened my reply using it as a linking adverb to demonstrate how they use it.

What I don't like is the one word reply, which I think really relies on correct inflection to be understood properly. Also, the lack of a 'thanks' adds to the confusion. It would be fine if they said 'well, thanks' with a positive tone.

You cannot "be well" without referring to your health. Things are going well. I am good.

Most people from North Carolina respond with "I are well."

I don't think you understand the question, 'how are you?'.

Plus, I think you'll struggle to find a dictionary that lists well only as an adverb or as an adjective that only refers to health.

I feel badly about this argument.

New Old Guy, I was just being funny, although without getting too far into the politard side of things, I don't find it especially surprising that a guy who novelized Magic: the Gathering and is blurbed by Newt Gingrich would of turned out to be a ******.

Thank you.