Who'd a thunk it?

[Laurence Horn]

At 6:24 PM -0400 6/29/05, Page Stephens wrote:
>Hopefully supposedly (supposably) isn't looked down on as much as hopefully
>is although supposedly I would guess it is.
>
>Page Stephens

"supposably" is at least as looked down on as "hopefully", although I
didn't count to see how many of the 14,300 google hits were devoted
to bemoaning the use of "supposably" by others.  Presumably even some
of those who grudgingly accept the latter because it is, after all,
the only adverb meaning what it does (given that "it is to be hoped"
doesn't count as an adverb), while "supposably" doesn't bring a lot
more to the table than "supposedly" is already sitting there with.

Larry

>
>>  [Original Message]
>>  From: Arnold M. Zwicky <zwicky at CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
>>  To: <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>>  Date: 6/29/2005 6:12:52 PM
>>  Subject: Re: Who'd a thunk it?
>>
>>  ---------------------- Information from the mail header
>-----------------------
>>  Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>>  Poster:       "Arnold M. Zwicky" <zwicky at CSLI.STANFORD.EDU>
>>  Subject:      Re: Who'd a thunk it?
>>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>---
>>
>>  On Jun 29, 2005, at 1:38 PM, Wilson Gray wrote:
>>
>>  > For decades, I've been using the non-word "supposably" as a jocular
>>  > replacement for "supposedly." Today, for the first time, I heard
>>  > someone seriously use "supposably." It was a woman with the surname
>>  > "Zanquis" from Hartford, CT, on the Judge Judy Show.
>>
>>  ummm... wilson, back on 23 september, you asked me, on this list:
>>
>>     Arnold, do you have "supposably" already? It's *very* common in BE.
>>
>>  and inaugurated a thread on "supposably", "assumably", and more,
>>  including some google counts.
>>
>>  arnold