4 ms·
I don't understand why people get upset at people using 'literal' incorrectly.... it is almost always used as a form of hyperbole, which seems like a totally v
by cortesoft 6y ago
I don't understand why people get upset at people using 'literal' incorrectly.... it is almost always used as a form of hyperbole, which seems like a totally valid linguistic use.
If I say "oh man, I literally die every time someone complains about people using literally wrong", I am clearly using hyperbole... no one is being confused, and I am not changing the meaning of a word.
Do people think we are going to ruin accurate measurements when I say something like, "this thing weighs a ton!" when the item clearly weighs a lot less than 2000 pounds?
- waterhouse 6y agoI was visiting a friend at college, staying in his room. I once told him that I would be literally sleeping with someone, and he at first didn't realize that this meant I wouldn't be sleeping in his room that night. So the corruption of "literally" has indeed interfered with my communication.
- srtjstjsj 6y agoHuh? Do you mean the corruption of "sleeping with"? Or did you mean "someone else"?
- waterhouse 6y agoIt's the corruption of "literally" in "literally sleeping with". My friend didn't realize that this meant sleeping in that person's bed with them, until I explained it.
- rendall 6y agoWhile I agree that it's a valid example of hyperbole, to me, using literally to mean figuratively is the sonic equivalent to writing many exclamation points!!!!!!! You can do it, but it's bad form, and doesn't make the point the speaker wants to make
- dllthomas 6y ago> using literally to mean figuratively I contend that this isn't a thing. It's absolutely the case that "literally" is often used when the sentence is figurative, but for it to mean "figuratively" it would have to be the intent of the speaker that the inclusion of "literally" makes the utterance more likely to be understood as figurative. I think it is instead used as an intensifier. All of that said, I don't have any principled objection to protest against it on stylistic grounds. I just think we should try and be clear about what's going on. (And I recognize that I'm disagreeing, here, with at least one dictionary - I believe they got it wrong.)
- srtjstjsj 6y agoRight a figurative use of "literally". Hopefully you'll understand the meaning. Next let's debate what "hopefully" means.
- lmm 6y agoThe whole point of "literally" is to mean "this is not hyperbole or exaggeration, I mean the thing that I am saying". So using it to exaggerate can be confusing. Of course in most cases you can figure out what the person meant with a bit of effort, but that's true of any mistake.
- JackFr 6y ago‘Literally’ is just going through the same transformation ‘really’ did a couple of centuries ago. Literally. I’m more curious what word will come up to take on the old role of ‘literally’ when ‘literally’ becomes purely an intensifier.
- srtjstjsj 6y ago"and I am totally not making this up" which unfortunately is also lost. The problem is Godelesque. There's no way to form a consistent language that includes lies.
- philwelch 6y agoPeople are just using the word "literally" ironically.