At 12:38 PM 8/16/2002 -0400, Mark A Mandel wrote: >On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Steven Brust wrote: > >#My position can be expressed as follows: Some changes to the language make >#it more flexible, powerful, and precise. Other changes make the language >#more rigid, weak, and vague. I support the former by employing the new >#usages as they occur, and oppose the latter by not using them, and by >#objecting to them when they happen to come up as a subjects of conversation. ># >#What is your position? > >With regard to the innovation under discussion, the use of "hopefully" >as a sentence adverb, my position is that Because you didn't answer the general, I'm going to assume that, more-or-less, we agree--some changes are good, and some are not. This means we can get on to arguing about specific cases. > 1. It is useful. It provides a convenient way of expressing something >that is difficult to express otherwise -- see my previous post quoting >the Usage Note from AHD4 and commenting on it. Okay, excellent. This permits us to go from the general to the particular and back to the general, which is how knowledge develops according to Hegal, and we can't argue with Hegal because he's dead. It seems to me that there is a phenomenon in language where a phrase appears to say more than it does. That is, certain phrases cast an illusion of meaning beyond the meaning. In another post, I gave the classic example of, "Susan and I are having a relationship." This means less than, (usually and in my opinion) both speaker and listener think it means. Trying to define what they mean by this will show you what I mean. Q: Do you agree, even if not with the example of "relationship" with the phenomenon? My problem with "hopefully" is exactly here. The illusion of saying more than is actually said irritates me. To me, this outweighs the advantages you mention. > 2. It does not interfere with previous usage. I agree with you on this. >I am going to have to drop out of this discussion soon because it's >absorbing me too much. Phooey. I will be *very* sorry to lose you from this discussion.