I agree that "literally" is used to mean "not literally". My beef is that such usage diminishes the language, rendering that word ambiguous. And I claim that

I agree that "literally" is used to mean "not literally". My beef is that such usage diminishes the language, rendering that word ambiguous. And I claim that a significant minority of readers find these usgaes sufficiently jarring that they stop reading, or at least have their attention diverted from the writer's meaning. Therefore I think these usages should be avoided, simply in order to achieve the writer's intent. And I think lexicographers should signpost usages that are likely to repel some readers. Dictionaries are used (a) to help decode a text, and (b) to help construct a text. In the former case, you need a descriptivist lexicon, in case the text involves dubious usages. In the latter case you need a lexicon that at least warns you that certain usages are annoying to some people.