I actually see native speakers make the "should of" mistake far more often than I see non-native speakers make it, probably because it's a mistake based on pronunciation. Native speakers often incorrectly spell based on pronunciation, while non-native speakers often incorrectly pronounce based on spelling. In fact, the (presumably native-speaking) author of the linked blog post makes such a mistake - he uses the word "manor" where he should have used "manner." Frequent signs of non-native English are improper verb conjugation and article placement, rather than something like "should of."
100% correct. Also, non-native speakers tend to make grammar errors, use idioms wrongly, etc. They (we) don't tend to mistake "to/too", "there/their/they're" and "your/you're", because second languages are usually acquired through the written word.
Well, I do sometimes make the mistakes you give as examples, but only as I get very tired, when I curiously start to mix up all kinds of homophones and near-homophones with no apparent connection (particularly curious to me since, as you suggested, I picked up English primarily through writing; it's not like I have a habit of sounding out words. It took many years from I started reading and writing English until I ever used it in a spoken conversation)
For the same reason I can't ever see me using "should of" - it sounds too wrong.
It is rarer for me to make the mistakes you list than mixing up completely unrelated homophones, though, as they're definitively ones I'm extra aware of.
In parts of England "should of" is in common use amongst younger speakers to the extent that "should of" to me is associated with South or East London more than non-native speakers (though it's in use many other places in England too).
My four year old might occasionally use it because his friends does, and he knows it drives his mother absolutely crazy when she notices he uses South London dialect features.
I always thought the use of "should of" is because people like to shorten "should have" to "should've", especially in conversation. This seems to have lead to people mistakenly thinking "should've" when spoken is actually "should of". Not sure how people can read "should of" and not think it makes no sense though.
* my grammar is most likely not great either, so I can't really criticise to be honest!
This veiled attack on someone because of what their name may imply makes my stomach turn.
I've sometimes wondered whether those who are most passionate about bashing other languages and frameworks, are in fact, just using transferring the behaviour from more direct bias towards a group or person.
I hesitated in making a joke on HN, since that never works well here. I was actually making fun of the practice of having Indian call center employees go by ridiculous American sounding names that couldn't possibly be theirs.
I always have to chuckle when you get someone on the line, and they say "my name is 'Scott'", and you have to think, "No, its not." I thought that was what the parent meant by "Scott". As in, that's not his real name.
It was not an attack on anyone other than the people that run these call centers. Most of the comments thought I was picking on grammar or something, which wouldn't have been very funny.
I love jokes. My sense of humor is such, that it doesn't have to take shots at people for things they can do nothing about: the colour of their skin, their looks, their height, the name they're given, how they didn't choose the families they were born into.
Still, let's chill out. And process the half hearted apology of "sorry if anyone was offended, but not sorry I said it because I don't see the big deal".
I wasn't really that upset by you putting a reasonably accurate looking and long south indian name..
It did made me wonder if doing so was really that evolved from making up a willfully ignorant African or Asian inspired name 30-60 years ago. That, in turn, made me wonder if we're really progressing, and what made me write.
What's a joke to me, is how little empathy there is when someone is told to change their name to make it more acceptable and easier to pronounce because they're not worth knowing.
Maybe it'll start getting better when narrow minded thinking stops telling the world to be more open minded to tolerate their continued close-mindedness.