,
The Uncertainty of the Future
Lists, predictions and unproven assertions can be worded more vaguely so that they are more likely to be true
THE PRACTICE OF HEDGING
The post before this (95. Making Statements More Uncertain 1) explains how statements sometimes need to be made less definite for their truth to be guaranteed, and that hedging is the name often given to this practice. The point is also made that different statement types have to be hedged in different ways, with the result that the language of hedging is itself quite variable. Two types of hedged statement are analysed in that post – quantifications and generalizations – and at least three others are suggested to exist. This post is about these three other ways of hedging.
.
HEDGING OF LISTS
Lists in a text are usually associated with what I call a “list name” – a more general expression that sums up all of the words in the list (see 55. Sentence Lists 2: Main-Message and 122. Signpost Words in Multi-Sentence Listing). List names do not have to be put into words, but they often are:
(a) The primary colours are red, yellow and blue.
In this case the list name primary colours is elaborated by the complete list red, yellow and blue. The main completeness indicator is the before the list name (see 162. Writing about Classifications). However, not all lists completely match their list name. Here is one that does not:
(b) Various European language types can be identified, such as Romance, Slavic and Germanic.
Here, European language types are not listed in full. The main linguistic indicators of this are the absence of the at the start and the use of such as before the list. Unmentioned language types include Celtic, Basque and Greek.
The reason why list-giving often needs to be hedged is that writers often cannot be certain whether or not the list is complete. This is especially the case in professional writing, where some lists are so long that knowledge of all their members is unlikely, and other lists – for example of advantages or future consequences – are open-ended and hence impossible to judge for completeness.
Lists are normally hedged by suggesting that they are incomplete, as in sentence (b) above. A slight problem with doing this is that it may sometimes result in untruth, the list actually being complete. However, I think this is likely to be rare, and the hedging will much more often prevent untruth than create it.
There are at least three main kinds of incompleteness language. The first is the same language that introduces examples. Although examples may be given for other reasons than hedging, they do also have this use. The words such as in (b) are example-showing. Alternatives are including, for example and – when the examples are in one or more separate sentences – expressions like one is or are examples. For a full survey, see 1. Simple Example-Giving.
Note the vague number word various before the list name in (b) (without a preceding the). A number word is common in this position before a list of examples, and it usually has to be vague because an exact one like three would contradict the idea of incompleteness that examples indicate.
Secondly, incompleteness can be shown by means of highlighting adverbs like notably, especially and in particular. These suggest not just that the list is incomplete, but also that its mentioned members are somehow more important than the unmentioned ones (see 198. Indicating Importance). Here again, hedging is not the only use but, given the frequency of uncertainty about lists, it is a common one. For more on this kind of incompleteness language, see 54. Sentence Lists 1: Incidental and 122. Signpost Words in Multi-Sentence Lists.
The third major way of showing incompleteness involves the list name rather than the list. Compare the following with (b) above:
(c) The main European language types are Romance, Slavic and Germanic.
Here, the list is shown to be complete in terms of the underlined list name (hence necessitating the at the start), but incomplete in terms of European language types. The incompleteness is shown by the words the main before the list name.
The words the main again carry the additional suggestion that the mentioned list members are special in some way. Most expressions like it do the same, but not all. Those that do carry this meaning include the best-known, the commonest, the major and the most important.
Expressions that can be used with a list name without suggesting specialness include some of the… and there are at least… (+ exact number word). There are also exact number words without the, for example three instead of the main in (c). If the list name is being used as a heading rather than part of a sentence, a further alternative is to write no words at all before it (see 178. How to Write a Heading).
.
HEDGING OF PREDICTIONS
Predictions are common in professional writing (see 147. Types of Future Meaning). They can hardly ever be made with certainty – the famous American Benjamin Franklin wrote in 1789 that nothing in the future is certain “except death and taxes”. Uncertainty about the future makes predictions an obvious candidate for hedging. The main language for hedging predictions is modal verbs, adverbs and adjectives. Consider this unhedged prediction:
(d) Humans will travel to Mars in the future.
The modal verb will is a typical means of making predictions, but unfortunately it also implies certainty. If we wish to allow for the unpredictability of the future, we can replace will with either the modal should (showing over 90% certainty), or may (around 50% certainty), or might (around 30%) or could (around 10%).
Alternatively, sentence (d) can be hedged by means of an opinion-showing “judgement” adverb placed after will. Possible adverbs in descending order of meanings from near certainty to near uncertainty are probably, most likely, possibly, perhaps and conceivably (see 121. Sentence-Spanning Adverbs, #3).
Adjectives that achieve the same effects include probable, likely, possible, conceivable and unlikely. A common way of using them is with that after a starting It, e.g. It is (or seems) possible that… (see 181. Expressing Possibility).
.
HEDGING OF UNPROVEN ASSERTIONS
The post before this (95. Making Statements More Uncertain 1) highlights how generalizations can be hedged to guard against their being too broad. However, generalizations can be wrong in another way, which requires a different kind of hedging. They can be the total opposite of what is true. Consider this:
(e) A high-fat diet shortens human life.
This is a highly controversial statement: some experts agree and some disagree. As a result, it is an opinion rather than a fact (see 107. The Language of Opinions). However, the way it is worded implies certainty (see 224. Asserting the Truth of what you Say). In order to acknowledge the possibility of it being wrong, a suitable hedging word is not a frequency adverb like normally, but a truth-commenting one like seemingly (= “looks true”).
Other adverbs of this kind include apparently, arguably, conceivably, perhaps, probably, possibly, presumably, surely and in all likelihood (see 121. Sentence-Spanning Adverbs, #3). Alternatively, you can add a full verb, like SEEM or APPEAR, or a “modal” verb: may well to suggest the truth is highly likely, may if it is 50%, might for around 30%, and could for 10% (see 237. Auxiliary Verbs in Professional Communication, #2).
This kind of hedging is applicable to non-general statements as well as to general ones. An example is:
(f) The Minoan civilization was perhaps destroyed by a volcanic eruption.
This is non-general because it refers to one particular (past) time rather than all times. The meaning is that evidence exists for a volcanic eruption having been the cause of the Minoan disaster, but such a theory might be wrong, the cause having been something entirely different.
We could also use SEEM or APPEAR with a past event, rather than an adverb like perhaps, with the event verb in the perfect infinitive form – …to have been destroyed above (see 282. Features of History Writing, #4). Another possibility is may have….
A further useful verb for this kind of hedging is INDICATE, a common verb in professional writing to link evidence with a conclusion, like this:
(g) The findings indicate that drug use cannot be controlled.
Indicate here means something in between prove and suggest. Prove is often too strong because it suggests the definite truth of the conclusion, something that evidence rarely confirms; while suggest is too weak. When the evidence comes from a written source, INDICATE is a “citation” verb (see 76. Tenses of Citation Verbs). It is known to be one of the most common, probably because of its hedging nature.
Also notable is I/We take it that… before a conclusion drawn by the writer from something they have heard or seen. It says “I think what …. is implying is that…” – again useful for avoiding definiteness when uncertainty is felt (see 264. Variations in the Use of TAKE, #18).
Finally, if a statement is being given as a reason for another one, its truth can be hedged by placing it not after because or since, but after if (see 179. Deeper Meanings of “if”, under “Likely Conditions”).
guinlist 