Gordon Robinson | Could you? Would you? Did you?

Everybody should know by now I’m a language nerd.

The evolution of modern language leaves me cold. For example, I doubt I’m capable of ever accepting “access” or “impact” as verbs. And I mourn the passing of the word “affect” – missing in action presumed dead for too long. But, today, I’m all about protecting the word “would”, especially when used in conjunction with “have”, from widespread, vicious abuse.

People’s inane use of “would have” burns my rear end more intensely than a flame about three feet high. As a practising Civil Law Advocate for decades, I’m often forced to grind my teeth down to the gums because a witness insists on answering “What happened next?” with:

“I would have sent the report to head office.”

This is where I ziplock my mouth; take a long, deep breath, and, forced by rules of courtroom decorum, simply ask “but did you?”

I coulda been

a little more understanding

and I’d still be loving you right now.

I should have been smarter.

I could have used my head

and we’d still be together somehow.

If I coulda, woulda, shoulda,

that’s what folks always say.

If I coulda, woulda, shoulda,

and it’s always too late.

I’m saying it now…

I’ve tried repeatedly to research where this misconception that “would have” means “did” started but to no avail. I’m convinced it was first used in ancient Rome by a Christian desperately trying to avoid being thrown into the Colosseum to joust starving lions. There seems to me no other possible justification for the egregious assault on language and logic.

Now I hear it everywhere. It abounds in media as broadcasters and guests throw the phrase around without batting an eye. I heard it used by a young presenter at a recent constitutional law forum. So it appears to be a legacy (or, today’s politician’s favourite phrase, intergenerational) thing.

So let’s try to terminate this “would have” atrocity.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, “would” is among the one thousand most frequently used words in the English language. It’s an expression of the past tense of “will”. “Will”, a word I rarely use unless my crystal ball is handy, assists attempts to predict the future which every common-a-garden Tout knows is impossible. “Would” is an attempt to portray an alternate past. An enhanced crystal ball – one that can apply the butterfly effect to history – WOULD be needed to do so accurately or reliably.

So the words “would” and “have’ ought never to be used together without the word “if” also appearing in the same sentence. Inherently “would have” can only be used to express an unreal or untrue idea that would or could be true if something else were also true. So “He would have sent the report to head office if it was complete” WOULD be correct language but WOULD still not answer the question.

I can’t over emphasize the dangers of allowing the words “will”; “would”; or “would have” to creep into your lexicon even if used in obedience of rules of grammar. For example “You would have health problems if you were a smoker” is grammatically accurate but as divorced from reality as any political promise. Smoking is dangerous to your health. But will a particular smoker develop health problems from smoking? Some might. Some might not. I knew two brothers who chain smoked. One died at 64 of lung cancer. The other lived to eighty-plenty and died from unconnected causes.

If I woulda stopped it

before it all got started out

I wouldn’t be so sad and lonely without you.

I wish there was a way,

to turn back the hands of time.

I’d do it different

if I had it to do all over again.

If I Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda, written by legends, Kenny Gamble and Leon Huff, was recorded by the great Lou Rawls for his 1977 album When you’ve heard Lou, you’ve heard it all. The album also featured Lady Love (Von Gray/Sherman Marshall) one of Lou’s biggest crossover hits.

law students and graduates must be sick and tired of my telling them that, to be a lawyer, you need only two talents namely command of the language and expertise in logic. Once you have those attributes you’re a lawyer no matter your origin, colour, creed, religion, sexual orientation or occupation.

The law is available on the internet (or in law libraries) for all to consume and regurgitate at will. Language and logic comes from within.

Peace and Love.

Gordon Robinson is an attorney-at-law. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com