摘要：The infinitive in English is the form of verb that has to at the start of it, like to be, to have, to bump, to grind.
This one ain't gonna please no penance.
这一个不会请没有苦修。
It's time to finally free ourselves from the tyranny of English's fake grammatical rules.
现在是时候让我们摆脱英语伪语法规则的束缚了。
I'm going to tell you where these illegitimate linguistic laws came from.
我要告诉你这些不合法的语言法则是从哪里来的。
Then I'll explain why absolutely none of them are worth sticking to anymore.
然后我会解释为什么它们绝对不值得再坚持下去。
Hopefully you'll join me for what promises to be a very liberating episode of Rob Words.
希望您能和我一起观看《Rob Words》这集令人非常自由的一集。
Now, I have broken one of these so-called rules in no less than all the things that I say during this video.
现在，我在这段视频中所说的每一句话都违反了所谓的规则之一。
Feel free to take me to task in the comments.
欢迎在评论中批评我。
OK, let's get started with rubbish rule of English.
好的，让我们开始讨论英语的垃圾规则。
number one.
第一。
Don't split the infinitive.
不要分裂不定式。
The infinitive in English is the form of verb that has to at the start of it, like to be, to have, to bump, to grind.
英语中的不定式是以 to 开头的动词形式，如 to be、to have、to bump、to grind。
And I remember being told even back in school never to ignorantly put another word between that two and the verb that it's accompanying.
我记得在学校时就有人告诫我，永远不要无知地在这两个词和它所伴随的动词之间放置另一个词。
Like I did just then.
就像我刚才那样。
Doing so is called splitting the infinitive because you are splitting the two elements of the infinitive apart from one another.
这样做称为分裂不定式，因为您将不定式的两个元素彼此分裂开来。
And it is often described as a mistake.
它常常被描述为一个错误。
But why?
但为什么？
Well, I don't know.
嗯，我不知道。
I really don't.
我确实不知道。
I can think of no practical reason why splitting the infinitive is bad.
我想不出任何实际理由来说明为什么分裂不定式是不好的。
So how have we ended up with this perceived rule?
那么我们是如何得出这个公认的规则的呢？
Well, I say, blame the Victorians.
嗯，我想说，这都要怪维多利亚时代的人。
And I'm going to cruelly lay the blame at the door of one Victorian in particular, the writer of this highly influential book, A Plea for the Queen's English, by Henry Alford.
我要毫不留情地把责任归咎于一位维多利亚时代的人物，他是这本影响深远的书的作者，这本书就是亨利·阿尔福德的《恳求女王的英语》。
Henry Alford was a grammarian and a pedant of the highest order.
亨利·阿尔福德是一位语法学家和最高阶的学究。
And he took it upon himself to write this book, setting out how he felt the English language should be correctly deployed.
他主动写了这本书，阐述了他认为应该如何正确使用英语。
In it, he made his own proclamation about splitting the infinitive.
在其中，他发表了自己关于分裂不定式的宣言。
Using as an example the phrase, to scientifically illustrate, he says, surely this is a practice entirely unknown To English speakers and writers.
他以这个短语“为了科学地说明” 为例说，对于英语使用者和作家来说， 这肯定是一种完全未知的做法。
It seems to me that we ever regard the two of the infinitive as inseparable from, and in Latin, nobody ever splits the infinitive.
在我看来， 我们一直认为不定式和动词不定式是不可分割的，而且在拉丁语中， 没有人会把不定式分裂开来。
Why?
为什么？
Because it's impossible.
因为这是不可能的。
But because English has this weird two-word infinitive, we can split it.
但是因为英语有这种奇怪的双词不定式，所以我们可以将其分开。
There's a reason, there's a space there.
那里有原因，那里有空间。
Go ahead, fill it.
来吧，填满它。
Indeed, there are times when to not split the infinitive is almost impossible.
确实，有时候不分裂不定式几乎是不可能的。
For example, if I write, I want to more than double my subscribers this year, please help me out, I have split the infinitive.
例如，如果我写道， 我想今年将订阅者数量增加一倍以上，请帮帮我，我已经拆分了不定式。
But what's the alternative?
但还有什么其他选择呢？
I want more than to double my subscribers?
我想让我的订阅者数量增加一倍以上吗？
That means something different, doesn't it?
这意味着不同的事情，不是吗？
Like I want to double my subscribers and, I don't know, give each of them a kiss.
就像我想让我的订阅者翻倍，然后，我不知道，给他们每个人一个吻。
Don't unsubscribe, it's okay, I probably won't.
不要取消订阅，没关系，我可能不会。
Unless you ask.
除非你问。
And I want to double more than my subscribers makes it sound like I want to double something else, too.
我想使我的订阅者数量增加一倍，这听起来就像我也想使其他东西增加一倍。
Also, sometimes splitting the infinitive can sound more natural than to not do it.
此外，有时分裂不定式听起来比不分裂不定式更自然。
See?
看？
Hot take alert.
热门警报。
Wouldn't Hamlet sound a bit more like a normal person if the question were to be or to not be?
如果问题是“是”还是“不是”，那么哈姆雷特听起来是不是更像一个正常人呢？
Something to think about.
有些事值得思考。
So I'm going to happily continue splitting the infinitive and...
所以我会很高兴地继续分裂不定式和......
You should feel like you can too.
您也可以感觉到。
Onto nonsense rule number two.
讨论第二条无稽之谈规则。
Don't never use no double negative.
永远不要使用双重否定。
A double negative is when you use two negatives in one sentence or one thought, like, I ain't never been to space.
双重否定是指在一个句子或一个想法中使用两个否定词，例如， 我从来没有去过太空。
The received wisdom is that in such a sentence, the two negatives, in this case, ain't and never, cancel each other out, meaning that I've actually just claimed to have at some point taken a trip beyond our atmosphere.
传统观点认为， 在这样的句子中，两个否定词（在本例中是“不是” 和“从不”）相互抵消， 这意味着我实际上刚刚声称自己在某个时刻进行了一次超越大气层的旅行。
For that reason, double negatives are considered a no-no.
因此，双重否定被视为不可接受的。
Although no-no is weirdly one double negative that apparently doesn't cancel itself out.
尽管奇怪的是，“no-no”是一个双重否定，而且显然不能自行抵消。
Now, I'm not going to argue that double negatives are a great thing.
现在，我不会争辩说双重否定是一件好事。
I would never write one down.
我永远不会写下来。
For example, it is ambiguous on the page and would potentially lead to some misunderstandings.
例如，页面上的内容含糊不清，可能会导致一些误解。
But I am going to defend its use in speech because I don't believe that when said out loud, a double negative is particularly ambiguous.
但我要捍卫它在演讲中的使用，因为我不认为大声说出双重否定时会特别模棱两可。
Remember that internet lady who said, ain't nobody got time for that?
还记得那位网络女士说过“难道没人有时间做这些事”吗？
Well, of all the countless memes that she sparked, did a single one of them rely on the interpretation that she in fact did?
好吧， 在她引发的无数模因中，有没有一个依赖于她实际上所做的解释？
Have time for that.
有时间做那事。
Of course not.
当然不是。
In fact, the clip's popularity is partly down to how emphatic she is about not having time for that.
事实上，这段视频的受欢迎程度在一定程度上源于她强调自己没有时间做这些事情。
And that emphasis is largely down to the double negative.
这种强调很大程度上归因于双重否定。
As a rhetorical device, the double negative can be highly effective.
作为一种修辞手段，双重否定非常有效。
And what's more, we've known that For over a thousand years.
而且，我们已经知道这一点一千多年了。
Just have a look at this.
只要看看这个。
This is a quote from Anglo-Saxon England.
这是盎格鲁-撒克逊英格兰的一句话。
It's in Old English, the language that would one day become the language we speak today.
它是用古英语写的，这种语言有一天会成为我们今天所说的语言。
Now in modern English, this translates to, he hasn't yet worked any miracles openly.
用现代英语来说，这意味着他还没有公开地创造任何奇迹。
But what it literally says is not.
但它字面上的意思并不是。
One of my issues with these rules is that they don't do anything To help with clarity.
我对于这些规则的一个问题是，它们对于帮助澄清事实没有任何作用。
I do think that the words we use are important.
我确实认为我们使用的词语很重要。
Language is important.
语言很重要。
For example, you know how Mark Zuckerberg recently announced that Meta was doing away with fax checkers?
例如，您知道马克·扎克伯格最近宣布 Meta 将取消传真检查器吗？
Well, your view on that story may well have been influenced by the specific language of the news sources you heard it from.
那么，您对该故事的看法很可能受到您所听到的新闻来源的具体语言的影响。
On Ground News, they've pulled together over 30 different sources on that story from across the political spectrum, allowing us to compare the coverage.
在 Ground News 上， 他们汇集了来自各个政治派别的 30 多个不同来源对这一事件的报道，以便我们比较报道内容。
Look how left-wing outlets use terms like blindsiding and assault to describe Zuck's move as an attack on journalists and truth, whereas many of the right-wing outlets laud it as a victory for free speech.
看看左翼媒体如何用“出其不意” 和“攻击” 这样的词语来形容扎克伯格的举动是对记者和真相的攻击，而许多右翼媒体却称赞这是言论自由的胜利。
As someone who's been a journalist for over a decade and a half, I can't stress enough how crucial it is to understand the political biases and reliability of your news sources.
作为一名拥有十五年从业经验的记者，我再怎么强调了解新闻来源的政治偏见和可靠性的重要性都不为过。
That's why I use Ground News, not just for their app and website, but also their excellent interest pages like those for the UK and Germany, which help me Stay informed about the stories that I think matter most to me.
这就是我使用 Ground News 的原因， 不仅因为他们的应用程序和网站，还因为他们出色的兴趣页面， 例如英国和德国的兴趣页面，这些页面可以帮助我随时了解我认为对我来说最重要的故事。
If you want to see how language shapes the news and make sure you're fully informed, go to ground.
如果你想了解语言如何影响新闻并确保你充分了解，请深入研究。
News slash robwords or use my special QR code and get 40% off unlimited access, like I have, to Ground News.
新闻斜线 robwords 或使用我的特殊二维码， 即可获得 40% 的折扣，无限制访问 Ground News， 就像我一样。
OK, on to our next bit of nitpicky nonsense, which is that none is always singular.
好的，我们继续讨论下一个吹毛求疵的废话，那就是“无总是单数”。
Have you ever said something along the lines of, oh, we were going to go out tonight, but none of us have any money, and been told, um, actually, it should be none of us has any money?
你有没有说过这样的话，哦，我们今晚要出去，但我们谁都没有钱， 然后被告知，嗯，实际上，我们应该都没钱？
I don't know where that voice came from.
我不知道那个声音是从哪里传来的。
But I do remember being corrected like that back when I worked at the BBC, an organisation staffed by many of the most particular users of the English language you could ever expect to meet.
但我确实记得当我在 BBC 工作时， 我曾这样纠正过，这个组织的员工包括许多你能想到的最特别的英语使用者。
And thankfully so, someone has to maintain standards.
幸运的是,有人必须维持标准。
And on this occasion it was explained to me that none is a contraction of not one and therefore should only ever be treated as singular.
这次，有人向我解释说，none 是 not one 的缩写，因此只能被视为单数。
Makes sense.
有道理。
You wouldn't say one of us have money, would you?
你不会说我们其中一个人有钱吧？
So I went along with it, for ages in fact, until I actually looked it up and found that for centuries writers have used none with the plural, like I did.
所以我坚持了它，事实上很长时间，直到我真正查阅后发现几个世纪以来作家都没有像我一样使用过复数形式的 none。
See?
看？
And that's because, contrary to what I was told, none isn't just short for not one.
这是因为，与我所听到的相反，none 不仅仅是 not one 的缩写。
Since at least the time of Henry VIII, it's been short for not any as well.
至少从亨利八世时代开始，它就一直很短。
So just as to say, do any pigs have wings is okay, to say none of the pigs have wings is also okay.
所以就像说“所有猪都有翅膀吗”是可以的一样，说所有猪都没有翅膀也是可以的。
And to deny that is to apply an approach that our language grew out of, 500 years ago.
否认这一点就等于采用了我们语言 500 年前诞生的方法。
So let's agree that none of us have to keep it up.
因此，我们一致同意，谁也不必继续这样做。
I've actually broken two rules there.
我实际上已经违反了那里的两条规则。
I've also flouted the next one on our list.
我也藐视了我们名单上的下一个。
Don't end a sentence with a preposition.
不要以介词结束句子。
This is a rule you might never have heard of.
这是一个您可能从未听说过的规则。
But one I just broke again, just there.
但我刚刚又弄坏了一个，就在那里。
It centres around words called prepositions.
它以称为介词的词为中心。
They're those little words like of, with, to, from, up, down, over, out.
它们是那些小词，例如 of、with、to、from、up、down、over、out。
They're used before a noun, or a noun phrase, or a pronoun, to show its relationship with what's come before it.
它们用在名词、名词短语或代词之前，以显示其与之前事物的关系。
I go to the shops.
我去商店。
The cat sits in my lap.
猫坐在我的腿上。
Alan pierced his foot on a spike.
艾伦的脚被钉子刺伤了。
They're essential elements of our language, and it is often said to be a misuse of English to put one at the end of a sentence.
它们是我们语言的基本元素，人们经常说在句子末尾加上一个是英语的误用。
But I reckon that's something we need to think over.
但我认为这是我们需要考虑的事情。
It's an issue we need to get into, a myth we need to reckon with.
这是一个我们需要深入探讨的问题，也是一个我们需要认真对待的神话。
Oh look, I've just broken that rule three times, but did it sound weird?
哦，看，我刚刚违反了这条规则三次，但这听起来很奇怪吗？
I don't think so.
我不这么认为。
The usual trick to avoid flouting this false law is to rearrange the sentence.
避免违反这条错误法则的常用技巧是重新排列句子。
But just listen to how much worse these are.
但听听这些情况有多糟糕。
That's something over which we need to think.
这是我们需要思考的事情。
It's an issue into which we need to get.
这是我们需要进入的一个问题。
A myth with which we need to reckon.
一个我们需要考虑的神话。
Someone who's said to have shared my revulsion is a certain Winston Churchill.
据说和我一样厌恶的人是某个温斯顿·丘吉尔。
The story goes that on receiving a complaint about his use of a sentence-terminal preposition, he's said to have scrawled a note saying, this is the sort of pedantic nonsense up with which I will not put.
故事是这样的， 在收到关于他使用句尾介词的投诉时，据说他潦草地写了一张纸条说，这是那种迂腐的废话， 我不会说。
Words to that effect.
话到这个份上。
It depends on where you're reading it, and to be fair, it may never have happened at all.
这取决于你在哪里读到它，公平地说，它可能根本就没有发生过。
The point is, the ugliness of the sentence demonstrates the folly of the rule.
关键是，这句话的丑陋表明了这条规则的愚蠢。
The idea that ending a sentence with a preposition is a misuse of our beautiful language is thought to go back only as far as the 17th century.
认为用介词结尾句子是对我们美丽语言的滥用这种观点被认为可以追溯到 17 世纪。
It then gives an example.
然后给出了一个例子。
Horace is an author whom I am much delighted with.
贺拉斯是一位令我非常喜爱的作家。
While he admits that popping the preposition at the end of a sentence is something our language is strongly inclined to, and also that it suits very well with the familiar style of writing, he also posits that not doing so is more graceful as well as more perspicuous.
虽然他承认， 我们的语言非常倾向于在句末添加介词，而且这也非常适合我们熟悉的写作风格，但他也认为， 不这样做会更优雅、更清晰。
Ironically, perspicuous means Easy to understand.
具有讽刺意味的是，清晰的意思是易于理解。
So his argument for avoiding ending a sentence with a preposition is that it is inelegant and confusing.
因此，他避免用介词结束句子的论点是，它不优雅且令人困惑。
Which it just isn't.
它只是不是什么。
But note that also, he doesn't dress this up as a rule, more just a preference for when trying to write formally.
但也请注意， 他并没有将其作为一条规则，而只是一种正式写作时的偏好。
This preference is again likely down to scholars' preoccupation with making English more like Latin.
这种偏好很可能又归因于学者们专注于使英语更像拉丁语。
Because again, this is a rule that it's impossible to break in Latin.
因为这是拉丁语中不可能打破的规则。
Word order doesn't allow it.
语序不允许这样做。
But English is not a language descended from Latin.
但英语并不是源自拉丁语的语言。
It is a Germanic language.
它是一种日耳曼语言。
And in Germanic languages, you can end a sentence with a A preposition.
在日耳曼语中，你可以用介词 A 来结束句子。
Indeed, in German, it is often essential.
事实上,在德语中,这往往是必不可少的。
However, Louth's book was hugely influential.
然而,劳斯的书影响很大。
It was used in British schools until as recently as the 20th century.
直到 20 世纪，它还在英国学校中使用。
Seriously.
严重地。
And despite him not calling the preposition thing a rule, millions of school children came away with the impression that it was.
尽管他没有将介词称为规则，但数百万学童却认为它是一项规则。
School kids not generally being known for their appreciation of nuance.
一般而言，小学生并不以欣赏细微差别而闻名。
Even our Victorian pal Henry Olford accepted that sometimes ending with a preposition was preferable.
甚至我们的维多利亚时代的朋友亨利奥尔福德 (Henry Olford) 也承认有时以介词结尾是更好的选择。
He wrote, where do you come from is the only way of putting that inquiry.
他写道，“你从哪里来”是提出这一询问的唯一方式。
Whence come you is, of course, pedantic.
您从哪里来的呢？当然，您很迂腐。
The criticism was that less and fewer have different, mutually exclusive meanings.
批评认为，“少”和“少”具有不同的、互相排斥的含义。
Less means lower in amount, degree, or value, and fewer Is lower in quantity.
Less 表示数量、程度或价值较低，而 Less 表示数量较低。
So less should only be used for things that you can't count out.
因此，less 只应用于那些无法排除的事物。
So yes, based upon those definitions of less and fewer, Tesco's sign was wrong.
所以是的，基于“少”的定义，乐购的标志是错误的。
And such was the volume of the cause for the chain to ditch them that they did just that, replacing them with this utter cop-out.
由于原因太多， 导致连锁店不得不抛弃他们， 所以他们只好这么做，用这种彻底的逃避现实的方式取而代之。
But I think Tesco were too hasty to buckle to pedantic public pressure.
但我认为乐购公司太急于屈服于迂腐的公众压力。
Because I think the definitions of less and fewer look less like this.
因为我认为 less 和 less 的定义不太像这样。
And more like this.
还有更多这样的。
I think we can all agree that you should not use fewer for amounts.
我想我们都可以同意,你不应该用更少的金额。
I want fewer.
我想要更少的。
Milk in my tea does not work at all.
我的茶里加牛奶根本不起作用。
But who the heck decided that you can't use less when talking about quantities?
但是到底是谁决定了在谈论数量时不能使用“少”呢？
Well, apparently, a guy called Robert Baker, he is the first person that the clever folk at Oxford have found writing about the subject.
显然， 一个叫罗伯特·贝克的人，他是牛津大学的聪明人发现的第一个撰写有关这个主题的文章的人。
Back in 1770, he, in his Reflections on the English Language, wrote that less is most commonly used in speaking of a number where I should think fewer would be better.
早在 1770 年， 他在《英语语言反思》中就写道，在谈论数字时， 最常用的词是“less” ，而我认为“更少” 会更好。
He says, no fewer than a hundred appears to me not only more elegant than no less than a hundred, but more strictly proper.
他说， 对我来说， 不少于一百不仅比不少于一百更优雅，而且更为严格恰当。
There are real echoes of Louth and Orford there, aren't there?
那里确实有 Louth 和 Orford 的回声，不是吗？
He's just talking about what sounds better rather than any essential need to write in this way.
他只是在谈论什么听起来更好，而不是谈论以这种方式写作的本质需要。
Mr Baker is making his statement in the 18th century, when, as our friends at Merriam-Webster point out, less has been used to modify plural nouns since the days of King Alfred.
贝克先生是在 18 世纪做出这一表述的，正如韦氏词典的朋友们指出的那样，自阿尔弗雷德国王时代以来， less 就被用来修饰复数名词。
They mean Alfred the Great, who ruled over a thousand years ago.
他们指的是一千多年前统治世界的阿尔弗雷德大帝。
In Old English, less could be used in this way.
在古英语中，“less”可以这样使用。
And looky here.
看这里。
Here it is in the 15th century, a reference to less ploughs.
这是 15 世纪关于少犁的说法。
And also in the 16th century, less faults.
而且在16世纪,错误更少。
So again, we're seeing that the tastes of self-appointed grammarians of the 18th and 19th centuries are dictating how we speak today.
所以，我们再次看到，18 世纪和 19 世纪自封的语法学家的品味正在决定我们今天的说话方式。
But before you take what I've said so far as permission to forget the difference between less and fewer, Let me just say that I do see why some people are so particular about it.
但是在你将我所说的内容视为允许忘记少与少之间的区别之前，我只想说我确实明白为什么有些人对此如此挑剔。
One such group are the compilers of the Guardian Newspaper's Style Guide, who make their position quite clear.
《卫报》风格指南的编纂者就是这样一个群体，他们的立场非常明确。
This is not just about supermarket signs that say seven items or fewer.
这不仅仅涉及超市标示的七种或更少的商品。
Only seven.
只有七个。
It can make a real difference in meaning.
它可以产生真正意义上的改变。
It then talks about fewer bad people, meaning something very different to less bad people, which is true.
然后它谈到了更少的坏人，这与更少的坏人的含义截然不同，这是事实。
Fewer bad people are lesser in number, whereas less bad people are not as bad as worse people.
少坏人的数量较少，而少坏人并不比坏人坏。
So, I accept that here the distinction is helpful.
因此，我承认这里的区分是有帮助的。
It defeats an ambiguity.
它消除了歧义。
But is there any ambiguity at all in the phrase, 10 items or less?
但是“10 件或更少”这个短语是否存在歧义？
And how about this situation?
那么,对于这种情况呢?
If I say to you, I have three fancy biscuits on my plate, do you have more or less?
如果我对你说，我的盘子里有三块精美的饼干，你的饼干是多还是少呢？
Doesn't that sound infinitely more natural than, I have three fancy biscuits on my plate, do you have more or fewer?
这听起来是不是比我盘子里有三块花哨的饼干更自然，你的饼干是多还是少？
More or fewer.
多或少。
It just doesn't work.
它根本不起作用。
I suppose my overall point here is that this less versus fewer distinction shouldn't and really can't be applied in all situations.
我认为我的总体观点是，这种少与更少的区别不应该、实际上也不能适用于所有情况。
And the more you look into it, the less reasons you find for treating it as a hard and fast rule.
但你研究得越多，你就越找不到将其视为硬性规定的理由。
OK, on to the next one.
好的，继续下一个。
This is the newest of the grammatical gripes that I'm trying to dispel because it has only been an issue for around a hundred years.
这是我试图消除的最新语法问题，因为它才存在大约一百年。
During the 20th century, beginning in the US, we got into the habit of using the word hopefully in a new way, a way that didn't strictly adhere to its meaning.
在 20 世纪， 从美国开始，我们习惯于以一种新的方式使用“hope” 这个词，这种方式并不严格遵循其含义。
We started saying things like...
我们开始说类似这样的话……
Is gonna get his ass kicked.
会被打屁股的。
I did the accents.
我做了重音。
We began using hopefully as an alternative to I hope that, or with any luck, terms like that.
我们开始使用“希望”来替代“我希望”或“希望一切顺利”之类的词。
And that's a way that it hadn't really been used before.
这是一种以前从未真正使用过的方法。
Prior to that, hopefully had only meant what its makeup suggests, to do something while full of hope, or in a hopeful manner.
在此之前，希望的含义就如同其结构所暗示的那样，充满希望地或以充满希望的方式去做某事。
For example, I was feeling lucky, so I hopefully bought a lottery ticket.
例如，我感觉自己很幸运，所以我满怀希望地买了一张彩票。
Now, there are people who cling to the idea that that is the sole meaning of hopefully and it should not be used in this new-fangled way.
现在，有些人坚持认为，这就是“hope”的唯一含义，不应以这种新奇的方式使用它。
But unfortunately for them, these people have already lost the argument.
但不幸的是，这些人已经输掉了这场争论。
Far more people would interpret I hopefully bought a lottery ticket as expressing hope that you bought a lottery ticket, like I hopefully locked the door before I left the house this morning, than Like you made the purchase in the hope of winning.
更多的人会将“我希望买了一张彩票” 解读为表达希望你买了一张彩票，就像“我希望今天早上出门前锁上门”一样，而不是“你买彩票是希望中奖” 。
In fact, I reckon these days someone can use the word hopefully thousands of times during their lifetime without once meaning in a hopeful manner.
事实上，我认为如今人们在一生中可能会使用“希望”这个词数千次，但其中一次却没有任何希望的含义。
What's more, the new meaning is actually really useful.
更重要的是，新的含义实际上确实有用。
I can't think of another single word that can replace hopefully in a sentence like this.
在这样的句子中我想不出另一个词可以替代“希望”。
And we're not the only ones to have come to that conclusion.
而且我们并不是唯一得出这个结论的人。
In German, the equivalent, hoffentlich, has evolved to serve exactly the same function.
在德语中，对应的词语 hoffentlich 已经发展到具有完全相同的功能。
So basically, don't let anyone tell you that you're using it wrongly if you do use it in the 20th century fashion, because the meaning has undoubtedly evolved.
所以基本上， 如果您确实以 20 世纪的方式使用它， 不要让任何人告诉您您使用错了，因为它的含义无疑已经发生了变化。
So there you go.
就这样。
Less than seven, there were six, rules of English grammar you hopefully ain't no longer going to even bother with.
少于七条，有六条，希望您不再需要理会英语语法规则。
If you have enjoyed this video, I hopefully ask you to subscribe and to maybe watch this video next, and I'll see you over there.
如果您喜欢这个视频， 我希望您订阅并观看接下来的这个视频，然后我们就在那里见面吧。
Take care.
再见。
来源：英语东
