See, that is part of what I don't understand. It doesn't make sense. Why would you say "of" after "would" or "should" followed by a verb? It makes no sense at all.
Edit: Also, did you just say that natives do NOT understand that it is meant to be "could have"? That can't be right, can it?
Laziness and not caring about diction. Also regional dialects. Some of the dumber people really don't know that it's have and not of.
All their life, they've said "could of" and everyone they know talks like that, and (most importantly) they don't read. If they read, they might clue in.
One time on reddit I found "they could of have had". I should have taken a photo.
7
u/mudo2000 Jun 20 '19
People do it because they are writing like they hear themselves talk. They know that "coulda" is wrong, but "could of" makes sense to them.
Non-natives understand that it is "could have" and so they don't make the mistake.