BROWSE HOW TOs

How to Use Hopefully Correctly

By eHow Education Editor

Rate: (0 Ratings)

“Hopefully" causes confusion and problems for most who use, hear, or read it. Once upon a time, Robert Louis Stevenson's words "to travel hopefully is a better thing than to arrive" had but one clear meaning, and that was to travel with hope. It is incorrect to use "hopefully" to mean "to hope for." That brings a whole different meaning to Stevenson's famous words

Flag Article

Instructions

Difficulty: Moderate

Step1

Understand that "hopefully" may be one of the most abused words in the English language. Take for example the sentence: Hopefully, the package will arrive. In this case, "hopefully" is a dangling modifier, because the package is not hopeful. "Hopefully" describes nothing at all in this sentence.

Step2

Recognize that the misuse of "hopefully" is noncommittal language. It does not tell us who or what is hopeful or who or what is doing the hoping. The question lingers: "Hopefully" to who?

Step3

Use "hopefully" correctly to mean "prayerfully" or "filled with hope." If you want to say "I hope" or "it is hoped" then say just that.

Step4

Look at these other examples of the misuse of "hopefully." Hopefully the rain will come today. This sounds like the rain is hopeful. Here is another. Hopefully the student will win the spelling bee. It is not clear who is doing the hoping--the writer, the student or the audience.

Step5

Know that "hopefully" is not the only word so misused. Bill Bryson points out in "Bryson's Dictionary of Troublesome Words" that "apparently," "presumably," "happily," "sadly," "mercifully," and "thankfully" are as unattached and noncommittal as "hopefully." "Hopefully" is best avoided, Bryson concludes, because of its ambiguity and the writer's easy escape from taking responsibility for conveying a clear message.

Comments

Interlingua said

Flag This Comment

on 9/30/2008 This is pedantic nonsense. One of the best ways to separate language lovers from pedants is to ask their opinion of "hopefully". In sentences of the type criticized in this article, "hopefully" does not, it's true, describe any one element of the sentence. Rather, it modifies the sentence as a whole. Many adverbs do this, and their use is considered unproblematic: surely, frankly, honestly. These can be called modal adverbs since, like modal verbs (can, should, must, might, etc) they express the speakers attitude to the matter under consideration. As such, despite Bryson's claims, they are no more (nor any less) likely to lead to confusion or ambiguity than the use of modal verbs.

Adverbs aren't alone in having the ability to modify sentences as a whole; many adjective clauses do the same. "I don't work on Sunday, which is no surprise." The "which is no surprise" modifies the sentenc

Interlingua said

Flag This Comment

on 9/30/2008 This is pedantic nonsense. One of the best ways to separate language lovers from pedants is to ask their opinion of "hopefully". In sentences of the type criticized in this article, "hopefully" does not, it's true, describe any one element of the sentence. Rather, it modifies the sentence as a whole. Many adverbs do this, and there use is considered unproblematic: surely, frankly, honestly. These can be called modal adverbs since, like modal verbs (can, should, must, might, etc) they express the speakers attitude to the matter under consideration. As such, despite Bryson's claims, they are no more (nor any less) likely to lead to confusion or ambiguity than the use of modal verbs.

Adverbs aren't alone in having the ability to modify sentences as a whole; many adjective clauses do the same. "I don't work on Sunday, which is no surprise." The "which is no surprise" modifies the sentenc