AP stylebook on "hopefully"

[PamNY]

I must be getting old. I know language evolves and changes, but this one has always bothered me. Hopefully, some of you understand how I feel.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifest...c=nl_headlines

[salsabike]

Nope---you're one of my favorite TE folks so I sympathize in general, but "hopefully" just doesn't bother me much, even though---or maybe because-- I've spent most of my life trying to make sure I don't say it I think split infinitives can sound better than non-split ones, too. But I appreciate the general "guardian of good language" approach.

[lph]

Um. I just read the article twice, and I can't see what "hopefully" is now accepted to mean.

Am I growing old, or wasn't it there? Hopefully, the latter.

[PamNY]

Relevant portion from the Post article:


Then, on Tuesday morning, the venerated AP Stylebook publicly affirmed (via tweet, no less) what it had already told the American Copy Editors Society: It, too, had succumbed. “We now support the modern usage of hopefully,” the tweet said. “It is hoped, we hope.”

“We batted this around, as we do a lot of things, and it just seemed like a logical thing to change,” says David Minthorn, the deputy standards editor of the Associated Press.

Previously, the only accepted meaning was: “In a hopeful manner.” As in, “ ‘Surely you are joking,’ the grammarian said hopefully

[indysteel]

There are a number of usages and grammatical mistakes that I find annoying, but "hopefully" and most other disjuncts are not among them. I use/arguably misuse them frequently. I've read a number of discussions over time, including this one, that indicate that the usage has been around a long time and hasn't always been as disfavored as it ultimately became. As you say, Pam, language evolves--for better or for worse. C'est la vie.

[lph]

oh, I see. Since "as in" (it is hoped, we hope) was missing, that part of the tweet didn't make sense to me and my mind just blithely ignored it