Re: "To whom"

>[1] Yes, for some few people "could of" actually involves a real "of", and
>writing it that way might be justifiable [albeit not to prescriptivist
>grammarians] but IME most people who write 'could of' actually say
>"could've".
Forgive my ignorance, but may I ask for a little example using "could of" as
"of"? :-)

I've never seen this in a sentence (or I've not understand and forget or
mis-interpreted it :-P)

What kind of "of" can it replace in natural speech?

I'd like my speech to be as natural as possible and that's the kind of thing
I need to understand


And, with the same goal of being able to talk naturaly:

I know how to pronounce "I'd go", "you'd go", "he'd go", "we'd go"...

but how is pronounced "it'd go"?

[It@d] with a very short schwa?

or is it simply not usable and everybody says "it would"?


-Max

Replies