Adjectives & Adverbs

Actually / in fact

Both actually and in fact can be used to modify or contradict a previous statement:

I hear that you're a doctor. ~ Well, actually, I'm a dentist.

Well, it may sound very straightforward to you, but in fact it's all very complicated.

Would you agree with me that teachers should refrain from socialising with their students? ~ Well, actually I think it's a good idea for them to socialise - up to a certain point!

Actually and in fact can also be used to introduce more detailed information or to make things clearer or more precise:

I'm going to take on a bit more responsibility now that Kevin's left ~ John, that's wonderful news. ~ Yes, well, actually / in fact I've been promoted to senior sales manager.

I got so bored listening to what he was saying that I actually fell asleep / in fact I fell asleep half way through his presentation.

Note that we can also use in actual fact or as a matter of fact to clarify matters or to introduce new information:

I got so bored with what he was saying that in actual fact / as a matter of fact I dozed off before he'd                finished speaking.

Actually is sometimes used to introduce unwelcome news:

Richard wants to invite us to spend the weekend at his cottage in the Lake District. Isn't that exciting? ~ Well, actually, I've already said we can't go.

Note that when actually is placed at the end of the clause, it confirms news that others do not expect:

I don't suppose you've posted my letters, have you? ~ I have, actually.

Did you enjoy that modern opera at Covent Garden? ~ I did, actually. Very much.

well

Well is more widely used as a discourse marker than in fact or actually. As we can see from the examples above and below it is very widely used to indicate that we are about to say something. It is sometimes used to give the speaker more time to think:

 So how much do you want for your 1999 Renault? ~ Well, I was thinking of £2,500.

So how do you propose to furnish the house? ~ Well, I thought we might invest in some second-hand furniture.

Well is also used to introduce a statement which indicates that expectations have not been fulfilled:

You know I said I thought I might go skiing with Jamie this year? Well, I'm not going to now.

How was the tennis lesson? ~ Well, in actual fact, we forgot to go.

Well can also be used to soften corrections or criticism:

You live in South Kensington, don't you? Well, Pimlico, actually.

You do like my yellow dress, don't you? ~ Well, yes, it's quite nice. But I think the blue one would have suited you more.

Why didn't you give Bob a lift back home? ~ Well, how was I supposed to know he was at the match?

I couldn't find my way to the music centre. ~ Well, why didn't you ask me?

Well can also serve to introduce important information:

You know I've been seeing a lot of Eddie lately? ~ Hmm. ~ Well, we're going to get engaged.

Oh well!

If you say oh well, you are saying that you accept the situation as it is, even though you are not very happy about it:

I'm afraid you'll have to pull out of the trip to Greece. ~ Oh well, it doesn't matter.

I'm afraid I forget to save that document and now I've lost it. ~ Oh well, it can't be helped. I'll just have to re-type it.

 Adjective order

When we use two or more adjectives together to describe a noun, the order we put them in is quite important. For example, we don't usually say an old Indian beautiful carpet. It sounds much better say a beautiful old Indian carpet.

As a general rule, adjectives are usually placed in this order:

opinion > size > quality > age > shape > colour > participle forms > origin > material type > purpose

The phrase a beautiful old Indian carpet follows these guidelines:

	1	4	8
	quality	age	origin	noun
a	beautiful	old	Indian	carpet

You don't have to include an example of every type of adjective, but the ones you do use should follow the order. So if you wanted to add red and green to the phrase a beautiful old Indian carpet, you would put it between old and Indian like this:

	1	4	6	8
	opinion	age	colour	origin	noun
a	beautiful	old	red and green	Indian	carpet

It sometimes helps to remember the order of adjective if you consider that adjectives whose meaning is closely, or permanently, connected to the noun are placed nearer to it in the sentence. So in this phrase: a large comfortable wooden chair – wooden has a very close connection with chair .

	2	3	10
	size	quality	material type	noun
a	large	comfortable	wooden	chair

Here are some more examples:

	3	7
	quality	participle	noun
a	new	improved	recipe

	1	3	10
	opinion	quality	type	noun
an	old-fashioned	romantic	candle-lit	dinner for two

Sometimes we can use but between adjectives, especially if their meanings seem contradictory.

	2		3
	size		quality	noun
a	small	but	tasty	meal

If we use 2 adjectives that are similar in meaning, we usually put the shorter one first: a soft, comfortable cushion.

'Like' as verb and preposition

Jose Luis Luque studying English in the UK writes:

Could you please tell me the difference between like as a verb and as a preposition?

like

Like as a verb is used mainly to talk about enjoyment, preferences and habits. It is perhaps not quite as strong in emotional terms as love, or be fond of or be keen on. Compare the following:

• Do you like cross-country skiing? ~ Yeah, I quite like it now, but I still prefer downhill.
• When I’m making a cold drink, I always like to put the ice and slices of lemon in first.
• How did you like the pumpkin soup? ~ Oh, I liked it very much.
• I’ve got blackcurrant mousse for desert. Do you like blackcurrants? ~ Oh, I love them.
• He’s a very kind person. I like him very much, but I could never go out with him.
• I’m a very social person but I don’t like people following me around all the time.

Note that like is not normally used in the progressive form and cannot normally be used without an object:

• What do you think of the conversation classes? ~ I like them. (NOT: I’m liking them.)
• Do you like garage music? ~ Yes, I do. OR: Yes, I like it. (NOT: Yes, I like.)

would like to = want to

Take care not to confuse like with would like to. They have quite different meanings. Compare the following and note the structural differences when using them:

• I'd like to / I want to send this parcel by international recorded delivery, please.
• Are you interested in going to the match on Saturday. ~ Yes, I'd like to. / Yes, I want to.
• If you'd like to / you want to take your coat off, please do. It's rather hot in here.
• I would like to visit him in hospital, but my wife doesn't want to. She doesn't like hospitals.
• I would have liked to have seen John before he left for Canada, but Mary didn't want to.

Note that when used for requests and suggestions, would like to sometimes sounds slightly more polite than want to.

like as preposition

Like as a preposition with nouns or pronouns is used to express ideas of similarity or comparison. Compare the following:

• When she's on stage, she looks a bit like Britney, but she sounds more like Madonna.
• Like you, I prefer to eat my breakfast in the morning without engaging in small talk.
• It was only five o' clock, but it seemed like the middle of the night, it was so dark.
• These plants grow very well in hot countries, like Costa
  Rica and Venezuela.
• What's Bournemouth like as a seaside town? ~ It's a little bit like Brighton. Quite lively!

'Lie' or 'lay' on a bed

Antonio Shonis in the USA asks:

What's the easy way to remember the difference between lie and lay ? 

lie (+ phrase of place) / lay (+ object)

Perhaps the easiest way to remember the difference, Antonio, is that lay is a transitive verb which needs an object to complete its meaning and lie is an intransitive verb which functions without an object and is followed normally by a phrase of place.

 First, see how the words look in the present and the past tense.

	Present	Past
lie	he lies..., he is lying...	he lay..., he was lying..., he has lain...
lay	she lays, she is laying	he laid, he was laying, he has laid

Now compare the following:

lay ( + object)	She laid the baby on the bed in order to change its nappy.
lie ( + phrase of place)	She was lying asleep on the sofa when her husband arrived home.
lay ( + object)	Can you lay the table for me please? Lunch is ready.
lie ( + phrase of place)	I told her not to lie out in the sun, but she must have lain there for at least an hour for her back was very sunburnt.
lay ( + object)	I had never laid carpets before, but I was determined to have a go.
lie ( + phrase of place)	When I looked out of the aircraft window, I could see that London lay beneath us.
lay ( + object)	His lawyer will lay great emphasis on his state of mind when the murder was committed and claim that it was manslaughter, not murder.
lie ( + phrase of place)	None of us knows what lies ahead, but you must try to take a grip on your life and decide where your future lies.

Let or leave

Salman from Pakistan writes:

I am 22 years old and have been learning English for 6 months. I would like to know the difference between let and leave.

Please explain with examples. I shall be very grateful to you.

We use both let and leave in different ways and for different purposes. They cannot be used interchangeably.

let + infinitive

A very common usage of let is in the phrase let us or let's when we are making a suggestion involving others.

We say this instead of Why don't we…? or I suggest we… which is quite formal. It is often used with shall we? as a question tag.

Compare the following:

• Let's just have a cold salad for supper this evening, shall we?
• And let's go for a run before we eat!
  OK. Let's do that!
• Let's forget I ever said that, shall we? I didn't mean to offend you.

When it is used with the negative there are two alternative versions to choose from: don't let's or let's not. Both are very common.

• Let's not get too involved in their argument. It's better if they sort it out themselves.
• Don't let's go to Sheila's party tonight. Let's just have a quiet evening at home

Let is also commonly used to make a suggestion to oneself in the phrase let me or to a third person in the phrase let him/her/them. Note also the usage with the infinitive of there is/there are.

Compare the following:

• Do you like this outfit?
  Let me see. I like the orange dress but not with that hat.
• I'm going to sell my car. Do you want to buy it?
  I'm not sure. Let me think about it.
• There's still a stain on this jumper.
  Let me try to get it out with this stain remover.
• Can Joey and Phoebe stay overnight next weekend? Oh, please let them stay.
• Let there be no doubts in your minds that we shall win this battle.

Let = allow/permit

We can see from these last examples, particularly the Joey and Phoebe example, that let also means allow or permit. These are more formal alternatives and require to before the infinitive. 

Compare the following:

• Let me say how pleased I am to see you here this evening.
• Allow me to say how pleased I am to see you here this evening.
• Permit me to say how pleased I am to see you here this evening.

• I wouldn't let them stay up after nine to watch the adult film on TV.
• I can't let you go to France without me.

Note that with the passive voice, we have to use permit or allow:

• We didn't let him go home until he had spoken to the Headteacher.
• He wasn't allowed/permitted to go home until he had spoken to the Headteacher. 

let me know/ let me have

Finally, let is frequently used with know, where it means tell, and have, where it means send or give.

Compare the following:

• Please let us know as soon as possible whether you are able to accept our offer.
• If you had let me know earlier, I would have saved it for you.
• Can you let me have those reports by midday on Friday, please?
• Let me have half an hour to think about it and then I'll let you know.

leave = go (depart/quit/abandon)

As we saw with let, leave has a number of different meanings and uses.

Compare the following:

• The plane left early as everybody was on board half an hour before take-off. (= departed)
• Nobody leaves school at the age of sixteen now, like they used to. (= stops attending)
• Don't tell Maureen I'm leaving her. (= abandoning)

left = remaining

Here it is almost opposite in meaning and is used as a past participle normally at the end of the clause, often with there is/are or have got:

• I haven't got any cash left. Can you get the sandwiches?
• There were only two days' rations left, but they had to last for six days.
• Nothing was left of the castle. It had been completely destroyed.

leave = let it remain

It is here that the meaning of leave comes closest to let, close but not identical.

Compare the following:

• I'll eat later. Just leave it for me in the fridge.
• I left my car in the car park and took the bus into the town centre.
• I can't make the decision. I'll leave it for you / to you to decide what to do.
• I can't get the stove to work.
  Leave it with me / to me. I'll deal with it.

This final example combines a number of different usages of let and leave:

• Let me finish off the translation for you.
  OK. There are only four pages left. I'll leave it for you. I have to leave now anyway!

There are even more shades of meaning of leave than we have covered. Check them out in a good dictionary.

Inversion

Marcela asks:

A very specific question, about grammar. Is there a rule about 'inverted subject verb word order in conditionals?’

 Martin Parrott answers:

Yes there is. It sounds terribly complicated - but really there are three examples when you can, kind of, invert the subject and the verb, and it's easy to learn them - but they're not terribly common.

Example 1: Future

The first case is a conditional referring to the future. You might say, if it rains, I'll stay at home. But, there is an alternative to that. Instead of saying 'if it rains', you can say 'should it rain'. Now there you're inverting, if you like, the verb should (it's an auxiliary verb) and the subject - inverting the order. That's for conditionals for the future: ‘should it rain I'll stay at home’, ‘should it be fine, I'll go out’. It's a little bit unusual, and it's a little bit formal.

Example 2: Present

There are two more phrases which involve some degree of inverting (changing round the subject and the verb). There's also what we sometimes call the second conditional: they are conditionals where we're talking about the present and imagining it's the present. It's different in some ways - so ‘I've got a friend who's really healthy and well and doesn't need looking after, but if he were ill, I'd look after him’.

We have another conditional which is sometimes called the second conditional - which we use to refer to things in the present when we imagine if they were different. So for example: ‘I've got a friend who's really healthy, never ill, never needs looking after’, but [I might imagine it!] if he were ill, what would I do? ‘If he were ill, I'd look after him.’ Now there is another way of saying that, which is ‘were he ill, I'd look after him’ - and there, we'd invert the auxiliary verb and the subject. So, instead of ‘he were ill’ we changed it to ‘were he ill’ and we leave off the 'if'.

So that's our second example. Of course, that's quite an interesting one too, because we're using 'were' instead of 'was' and remember in sentences like this where we're talking about the present and we're imagining it different (our second conditional sentences), we can use 'were' instead of 'was' after the subject. We can't say ‘was he ill, I'd look after him’ - it's the 'were' here.  ‘Were he ill, I'd look after him’, ‘were he miserable, I would try and cheer him up’, ‘were he poor, I'd give him presents’.

Example 3: Conditional to talk about the past

Normally if we're talking about the past and imagining if things were different, we use ‘if’ and then we use what we call the past perfect tense. So, ‘if I had known he was tired, I would have gone home earlier’ (I stayed there all night talking to him; I didn't know he was tired). If I'd known - I had known - he was tired, I would have gone home earlier.

There's an alternative to that we can use. Instead of saying ‘if I had known’, we can say ‘had I known’. We invert the 'had', the auxiliary verb and the subject – so our alternative to ‘if I had known’ is ‘had I known’. ‘If I had seen him, I would have spoken to him’ – ‘had I seen him I would have spoken to him’. ‘If she had got the job, she would have been happier’ – ‘had she got the job, she would have been happier’.

All the same

The interesting thing about these three examples is, in a way they’re all the same. In each of these examples, we get rid of ‘if’ and then we invert (we change the order of) the auxiliary verb and the subject. And each of them is more formal than using ‘if’, and each of them suggests that the condition – that this ‘if’ clause, the condition – is a bit less probable.

Transitive and intransitive verbs

Both Zbyszek from Poland and Iqbal Ahmad from Pakistan write that they find it difficult to differentiate between transitive and intransitive verbs: 'Please explain the difference and give us some examples.'

Intransitive verbs: subject + verb

If an action concerns only one person or thing, you mention only the person or thing that carries out the action (the subject) and the action itself (the verb). Verbs which describe such actions are called intransitive verbs, e.g.

• I waited and waited, but nobody came.

Many intransitive verbs describe physical behaviour or movement:

• As the boys arrived, the girls departed.
• The wind subsided, the sun came out and the water receded.
• My shares have collapsed, so I'm going to have to economise.
• His whole body was aching and his medical condition was deteriorating.
• She wept bitterly on hearing this news.

Note from the last example that intransitive verbs are often followed by a prepositional or adverbial phrase which provides more information about the action - when it occurs, where it occurs, how it occurs, what direction it takes, etc. Compare the following:

• I arrived at the station at a quarter past three.
• He travelled south with all possible speed.
• Katie was standing in the corner and Justin was lying on the bed.
• It happened yesterday. Vicky had behaved quite unacceptably.
• She could not remain in her company, so she turned and rushed out of the room.

Transitive verbs: subject + verb + object

Transitive verbs involve not only the subject, but also someone or something else, the object:

• She has many friends, but (she) admires Victoria most.
• "Blue suits you," she said. "Fashion does not interest me in the slightest," I replied.
• They haven't raised the standard of living much, but I still support the government.

Some transitive verbs can have two objects, an indirect object followed by a direct object:

• She brought me my breakfast in bed on a silver tray.
• He promised me a job as an insurance salesman.
• I lent my younger sister all the money I had.

We can also reverse the order of the objects and put the direct object first by inserting the preposition to before the indirect object:

• I lent all the money I had to my younger sister.
• He taught German to all the girls in the school.
• The newspaper has offered a reward of £10,000 to anyone with any information about the robbery.

Note that although they may be followed by adverbial or prepositional phrases, transitive verbs cannot be used intransitively. We cannot say:

• The newspaper has offered.
• That does not interest.
• I still support.

as the meaning is incomplete. Neither can we use intransitive verbs transitively. We cannot say:

• I'll have to economise my spending.
• His body was aching the pain.
• The sun came out the hills.

Intransitive or transitive

Many verbs in English can be used both transitively and intransitively. The object is often not needed when it is obvious what you are talking about. But it may need to be added to clarify what is meant. Compare the following:

• I asked him to come in, but he did not enter. He did not enter the room.
• When he entered the room, she was reading. She was reading a book about Buddhism.
• He sat down at the computer and started to type. He started to type an email to his half sister in Australia.

In these examples, the meaning of the verb does not change whether it is used transitively or intransitively. With certain verbs, the meaning does change. Compare the following:

• She runs a bed-and-breakfast establishment in Broadstairs.
• The bull was chasing him so he ran as quickly as he could.
• Do you want any help? ~ No thanks. I can manage perfectly well on my own.
• He had been managing the business for six years before it made a profit.
• I was out when she called.
• She called me a cheat and a liar.

-ing participle clauses

 Which is correct? 'I could hear the dog barking' or 'I could hear the dog's barking'?

I could hear the dog's barking is grammatically correct. The dog's barking uses a possessive 's and means the barking of the dog.

However, you have used the verb hear which gives the idea that you could hear something that was happening at the time you are speaking about. So it would be more appropriate to use the participle clause barking to give more information about the dog. The preferred phrase would be I could hear the dog barking.

So let's look more closely at -ing participle clauses.

We use –ing participle clauses to give more information about what was happening at a particular time.

•  Did you speak to the man wearing the grey jacket? (the man who was wearing a grey jacket)

•  The lady working behind the counter is very busy. (the lady who is working behind the counter)

•  I could hear the dog barking. (the dog which was barking)

We can also use –ing participle clauses to talk about something that happens all the time.  

•  At the end of the road there is a path leading to the station. (a path which leads to the station)

•  The agent has a website giving details of all the properties for sale. (a website which gives details of all the properties for sale)

With the verbs see, hear, watch, and listen to, the meaning can change depending on whether an -ing participle is used. Compare these sentences:

•  Stella saw the children cross the road. •  Stella saw the children crossing the road.

In the first one - Stella saw the children cross the road - the use of cross in the simple form implies that Stella saw the complete action – she saw the children cross the road from start to finish. But in the second one - Stella saw the children crossing the road – the use of the participle suggests that Stella saw the children while they were crossing the road – she didn't see the complete action. So in your example sentence Arun, I could hear the dog barking suggests that the dog was already barking when you heard it – and probably continued barking even when you had left.

Bare infinitive

Wolfgang Drescher from Germany writes:

What is the difference between:

President Bush has announced a plan to help prevent the spread of the AIDS virus.

President Bush has announced a plan to help to prevent the spread of the AIDS virus.

The difference is one of form only. There is no difference in meaning.

to-infinitive or bare infinitive

Help is a verb that can be used with or without to and with or without an object before the infinitive. When we use it without an infinitive it sometimes sounds more informal. Compare the following:

• Could you help me to look for my car keys? I can't find them anywhere.
• Could you help me look for my car keys? I can't find them anywhere.
• Would you like to help to cook dinner tonight? It's late and I'm feeling tired.
• Would you like to help cook dinner tonight? It's late and I'm feeling tired.

There are one or two other structures where to-infinitive and the bare infinitive are both possible. Expressions with do or did, such as what I've done or all I did can follow either pattern.

• I hate shopping so what I've done is (to) order a new computer over the Internet.
• All I did was (to) suggest that she should lend him no more money. I didn't insist on it.

When two infinitive structures are connected by and, or or, except or but and than or as, it is normal practice to omit to in the second clause. Compare the following:

• I would like you to tidy the house and (to) wash the dishes before I get home.
• Would you prefer to have a snack now or (to) wait until later before we eat?
• I could find nothing to do this afternoon, except read my book.
  My son does nothing but watch TV when he gets home from school.
• It's quicker to bike to the station rather than take the car.
• I have to fix breakfast for everybody as well as take the children to school before I can leave for work.

Bare infinitive only

Generally speaking, bare infinitive structures are much less common than to-infinitive structures, but after certain verbs they are necessary.

We use the infinitive without to after modal auxiliary verbs will, shall, would, could, can (but not be able to), may, might, must (but not have to), should (but not ought to), and needn't, (but not need to, which behaves like a normal verb). Compare the following:

• I can't agree with you on this, though I would like to be able to help you.
• You must finish your own work before you go out, but you don't have to help your sister.
• It will be hot and sunny today so you should put on plenty of sunscreen and you ought to wear a hat.
• He needn't take time off work, but he needs to rest in the evenings and get a good night's sleep before he sets off on the new expedition.

After the object after certain verbs, such as hear, see, make, let, there is no to:

• I saw him pour the medicine down the loo and I heard him laugh to himself.
• I cannot make you take this medication, I can only ask you to take it.
• I can't let you go to bed hungry. You must let me prepare you some supper.

After verbal idioms would rather and had better there is no to:

• I'd rather swim in the pool than go down to the beach.
  Geoffrey has just driven up in his car. You'd better see what he wants.

All of these, however, represent exceptions to the general rule. Most infinitive structures begin with to:

• I decided to leave work early. I intended to be home before six. And I had arranged to play tennis with Joan in the evening.

I was and I were

Dani from Brazil asks: 

I would like to know when may I or may I not use 'I was' and when may I or may not use 'I were'. What's the difference between them?

Thank you very much

This is a very interesting question, and to answer it we need to have a little look at history.

English is a member of the Indo-European group of languages - it includes Germanic languages, that's languages like English and German, Romance languages like Italian and Portuguese, Persian languages and many of the languages of the Indian subcontinent. And these languages all shared a common ancestor - for those of you who are interested, it was called proto-Indo-European. This language divided ideas into things which are real on the one hand, and things which are imaginary on the other.

This difference still exists in Latin languages like Portuguese, where you have indicative tenses to describe real things and subjunctive tenses to describe things which are 'wishes', 'untrue at the moment' or 'imaginary'.

If you translate the two sentences:

'He comes every Tuesday' and 'I hope he comes'

into Portuguese, the form of the verb is probably different - the first is indicative and the second is subjunctive.

English makes the same distinction, but it's much easier as subjunctive forms are usually identical to indicative forms, so you can't tell the difference. Basically 'I was' is indicative -

'I was having dinner when you called' or 'I was happy' - both describe real situations.

'I were' is subjunctive.

'If I were you, I wouldn't go' is not a real situation, as I cannot be you ...

'If I were you, I wouldn't go'.

It's very common to use the 'I were' construction in sentences with 'if' - or conditional sentences. This is correct, and technically speaking:

'If I was you ...' is incorrect, at least in formal speech and writing.

Unfortunately, it is quite common to hear native speakers say it, and it might be that the subjunctive form is gradually disappearing from English.

The subjunctive form is a little more flexible though - we can use inversion with the subjunctive, so instead of saying:

'If I were rich, I would build a new house for my family' - 

we can say:

'Were I rich, I would build a new house for my family'.

Although some people might say:

'If I was rich, I would build a new house for my family' -

I don't think anyone would say:

'Was I rich, I would build a new house for my family'! 

This flexibility might mean that 'I were' survives, at least in formal communication. I think that's a good thing!

Hope

Agata from Poland asks: 

Quite recently a group of English learners from Poland got interested in the following question:

What grammatical constructions are possible after a verb "hope"?

A lot of doubts were connected with proper usage of "will" after verb "hope".

Could you please provide elaborate and easy to understand answer to such question in "Ask About English" section?

Thank you in advance

Hi Agata,

It sounds like we'd better try to satisfy everyone's curiosity as quickly as possible!

The verb 'hope' is actually quite flexible. It's typical to use the present tense with 'hope' to give a future meaning -

"I hope that you have a good time," for example.

This is just like 'if' in the first conditional -

"I'll call you if anything happens."

But it's also possible to use 'will' in certain contexts -

"I hope that you will be able to finish on time." OR...

"I hope that you'll visit us again in the near future."

In almost all cases, the 'will' could be replaced by the present tense with little or no difference in meaning, but it doesn't always work the other way round.

"I hope that he has his passport with him." -

cannot always be changed to:

"I hope that he will have his passport with him."

as the first one has both present and future meaning, but the second one can only have future meaning.

So hope + the present tense is rather more flexible than hope + will, but sometimes they mean the same thing.

Some more examples...

"They hope that you'll remember your promise"

is almost the same as:

"They hope that you remember your promise", but -

"I hope that you agree to the proposal" - 

might mean that you've already seen or heard the proposal, but if someone says:

"I hope that you will agree to the proposal" -

it is less likely that you've seen it already and perhaps the proposal may not have been made yet.

The present continuous can also be used with 'hope' and here the difference between present and future is even stronger. If someone says:

"I hope that you're thinking of me"...

it clearly means that they hope the person is thinking of them right now, but -

"I hope that you'll be thinking of me"

obviously refers to some time in the future.

So to sum up, it's probably better to use hope + present, as this is more flexible, and only ever use hope + will if you are very clear that your meaning is in the future.

I hope that you and your friends have enjoyed all my examples, Agata!