The literal truth

I READ WITH PLEASURE Stephen F. Hayes's lament on the widespread and seemingly unstoppable misuse of the word "literally" ("Literally Exasperated," Dec. 13). It raised in my mind another abuse of language, pertaining to the word "incredible." Like a cancer, this word is infecting our discourse in a way that is destroying our ability to distinguish between the merely amazing and the (if you'll pardon the expression) literally unbelievable.

I made this mistake years ago in a conversation with a friend from Holland. I declared her account of an especially remarkable (though by no means impossible) chain of events to be "incredible." She fired back, "No it's not!" (Leave it to a nonnative English speaker to teach us how to use our own language.)

As a philosophy professor, I'm especially concerned about the prospect of losing our ability to make distinctions. I will continue to correct my incredulous students in this regard, in what may well turn out to be a losing battle to preserve our rich vocabulary for expressing astonishment that falls short of incredulity.

CHRIS STEWART

Houghton, NY

I THINK STEPHEN F. HAYES should consider what has become acceptable usage of the adverb "hopefully." In which case he should accept reality and "literally" throw in the towel. Having done so, Hayes can hopefully overlook other journalists' grammatical peccadilloes.

ED WELLS

Eau Claire, WI

COPYRIGHT 2004 News America Incorporated
COPYRIGHT 2005 Gale Group