Outrage Over Stylebook Change: Hopefully

[+ Lucky]

Sticklers for grammar are outraged that the Associated Press has changed its rule on the use of the word "hopefully." Historically, the word has been approved only for use to modify a specific word, not an entire sentence. Hopefully, this argument can be resolved peacefully.

Should you be one who is a stickler for proper grammar, or simply one who laments the fall of good grammar in today's internet, tweeting society, you may find today's column by New York Time's elder statesman on words Clyde Haberman useful or at the least interesting. "Language", Haberman says, "is the soul of a culture.":

 

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/19/is-this-the-end-of-proper-grammar-hopefully-not/#more-415373

[gallahadesquire]

Indubitably, Mr. Haberman feels he must modify at least the first sentence in each paragraph. Unaccountably, he seems to do this with malice and forethought.

[rguer]

Speaking of history, the first attested usage in this sense is from 1702, by Cotton Mather. So it's certainly not new.

[MsGuy]

Grammar itself is a useful tool for understanding a living language. Unsurprisingly, grammarians themselves prefer to wield their scapels on an unresisting corpse. Hopefully, English will survive their efforts to pour formaldehyde into its veins.

 

http://www.bostonpersonalinjurylawyerblog.com/Death_Rembrandt_autopsy_Harmensz_van_Rijn_painting.jpg

 

We own the language, not tight sphinctered grammarians.

 

Beware all school marms!