Take the 2-minute tour ×
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

While reading a book, I came across the word I'd've, as in:

I'd've argued against it.

While it was obvious what it meant, it left me puzzled. Is I'd've a proper word?

share|improve this question
1  
I think this is a duplicate of (or should be merged with) english.stackexchange.com/questions/50/… –  ShreevatsaR Aug 13 '10 at 17:25
    
Seems legit according to wiktionary and Sesame Street - youtube.com/watch?v=QF-yJqAMm2c –  Kobi Aug 13 '10 at 19:50
9  
I wouldn't've thought it was a problem. :) –  thursdaysgeek Sep 20 '10 at 23:15
4  
I'm not sure if Peter Shor is joking, but I hope so, because "of" written (or, in fact, spoken) in place of "'ve", as in > "I would of said no, " rather than the correct > "I would've said no," is a far too frequently encountered pet peeve of mine. Surely it's not correct? –  sarah Nov 20 '11 at 11:43
1  
Was I joking? Only partly. Note that I didn't say I'd of was a correct spelling, just a likely one. Consider this Ngram. –  Peter Shor Jun 5 '13 at 22:06
show 3 more comments

11 Answers

While it has a certain logic to it, I've always found "I'd've" a contraction too far, preferring instead to write "I would have" "I would've" or "I'd have".

Thinking about it, I can't recall seeing "I'd've" used any kind of published text.

share|improve this answer
7  
"A contraction too far." Love it. –  user362 Aug 13 '10 at 12:47
add comment

After reading your post, I realised that I say "I'd've" quite a lot in my actual speech. But I have never ever written it down, nor have I seen it written down (or, more accurately, I don't recall having ever seen it written down.)

It's not the kind of thing that I'd feel comfortable putting into a business email, definitely not an essay (unless that was my topic, oh, and I think that will be the topic of my next essay now.)

But it is the sort of thing which would fit nicely in the dialogue inside a novel. And you never know, it could one day be perfectly cromulent to write that, and would perhaps embiggen the written English language.

share|improve this answer
27  
+1 for "cromulent" and "embiggen" :) –  Lunatik Aug 13 '10 at 10:11
30  
I'dn't've written it down, either. –  pkaeding Aug 13 '10 at 20:34
2  
I never'd've known that such a trend would begin. –  Vincent McNabb Aug 13 '10 at 22:16
    
It reads a bit funny when it's I'd've but I'dn't've looks absolutely atrocious and I can't really see allowing the one without the other. –  LarsNielsen Mar 21 at 23:08
add comment

I would probably write it as "I'd 'ave", similar to the way you might write out how a cockney speaker pronounces "have". Otherwise I think most people read "I'd have" and recognize that most people will swallow the 'h', but I would hazard a guess that I'd've is just bad usage.

share|improve this answer
add comment

There are 49 incidences of I’d’ve in the Corpus of Contemporary American English (search for I 'd 've). All but one occur in dialogue in fiction. The other one was in a transcript of Oprah.

It doesn’t appear that I’d’ve has any substantial contemporary usage in nonfiction writing at any level of formality. Of course, people say I’d’ve all the time, but if they were to write it down, they’d probably write I’d have.

share|improve this answer
    
Interesting resource! Thanks. –  Kobi Aug 13 '10 at 19:22
add comment

I routinely use (and receive) multiply-contracted words in SMS messages as a conveniencing shorthand.

I don't think it should be used in current formal writing of any sort, though the opportunities for multiply-contracted words to promulgate would be interesting to watch.

share|improve this answer
add comment

I admit that I use "I'd've" in everyday conversation without even thinking about it but have never considered writing it and don't recall ever seeing it written, although it does remind me that in elementary school, we used to sing a song called "If I knew you were coming, I'd've baked a cake....baked a cake....baked a cake..." Wow, that was a blast from the past! :) Putting three words together into one word via contraction just looks weird.

share|improve this answer
    
You may like the youtube link I've added in the comment to my question :) –  Kobi Sep 1 '10 at 4:27
add comment

I write I'd've fairly frequently. I also use other rarely written contractions, such as should've. And, occasionally, words like wouldn't've, which is another triple contraction.

It's interesting that I'm the only person here to use I'd've. I like that contraction.

share|improve this answer
2  
I'd've called that a double contraction since there are two contractions in it (though three words). –  mgkrebbs Jun 1 '11 at 18:29
    
I use I'd've fairly frequently in casual correspondence (like email), but I wouldn't use it in a formal setting. –  Monica Cellio Jun 1 '11 at 19:29
add comment

The only place in which I've seen double-apostrophe contractions is in Charles Dickens' work.

That being said, they do have cromulence, and are technically acceptable for formal speech. ;-p

share|improve this answer
add comment

I think the thing is that "I'd've" sounds almost exactly like "I'd have" when pronounced (as opposed to "I would have"), but it's much more difficult to read.

Really, the difference between "I'd've" and "I'd have" is so small, I wonder if that's why it's never caught on.

share|improve this answer
add comment

I routinely write I'd've in emails, and no one has (so far) commented on its use.

Did have an ebrow raised once at its negative form: I'd'n't've

share|improve this answer
6  
+1 for the insane contraction; however, being that wouldn't, couldn't and shouldn't don't (and don't for that matter) have an apostrophe before the n, I must insist upon I'dn't've rather than your proposed spelling. –  snumpy Jun 2 '11 at 13:33
add comment
  1. Is I'd've a proper word?
  2. Is “I'd've” proper use of the English language?"

The answer is no for the first question. As others have already mentioned the shortening of the three words is quite common in everyday speech, and this written contraction form mimics the sound we make. It is extremely informal and I would never use it in writing not even under torture! :)

"I'd've" is a contraction of three separate words: I + would / should + have. But before any of us throw our arms up in despair it should be noted that at least the auxiliary used is correct.

Recently, (thanks above all to the Internet), it is becoming increasingly frequent to read and hear:

I should of; I would of; I could of and I might of.

So I'd hazard a guess that the people who write "I'd've" are aware of its correct full form and are more educated than at first glance.

Perhaps in five year's time we will all be reading: I'd'f or I't've and wondering what the hell it means on EL&U.

share|improve this answer
add comment

protected by tchrist Sep 26 '12 at 18:53

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality answers, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site.

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.