4 ms·

Even intelligent people that know the meaning of the word will make this mistake when writing casually. The English language would be much better off if we remo

Even intelligent people that know the meaning of the word will make this mistake when writing casually. The English language would be much better off if we removed the word "literally" from it. Or, I suppose, if we all just decided to accept that "literally" now means "metaphorically". In which case, please kill me.

SomeCallMeTim 14y ago
If it's a "mistake", then it's one that has been made for 300 years: http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_good_word/2005/11/the_word_we_love_to_hate.html http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_good_word/2005/11/the... Relevant excerpt: 'As is often the case, though, such "abuses" have a long and esteemed history in English. The ground was not especially sticky in Little Women when Louisa May Alcott wrote that "the land literally flowed with milk and honey," nor was Tom Sawyer turning somersaults on piles of money when Twain described him as "literally rolling in wealth," [...more...] Such examples are easily come by, even in the works of the authors we are often told to emulate.' Given the caliber of authors that have used "literally" for emphasis, I have a hard time standing behind the concept that it's even poor style. We can decide that, moving forward, we'd like to clean up English and use "literally" differently, but calling it a mistake rather than a offense to modern style is inaccurate. REGARDLESS, I thought this was exactly the kind of thread that Hacker News hated. :|
giblfiz 14y ago
do you literally want me to kill you now?
pyre 14y ago
"...the US financial system was literally melting down." is probably better written as: "...the US financial system was seriously melting down." Adding literally is an attempt to make the statement stronger than just: "...the US financial system was melting down."
lifeisstillgood 14y ago
Literally kill you?

SomeCallMeTim 14y ago

If it's a "mistake", then it's one that has been made for 300 years: http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_good_word/2005/11/the_word_we_love_to_hate.html http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_good_word/2005/11/the... Relevant excerpt: 'As is often the case, though, such "abuses" have a long and esteemed history in English. The ground was not especially sticky in Little Women when Louisa May Alcott wrote that "the land literally flowed with milk and honey," nor was Tom Sawyer turning somersaults on piles of money when Twain described him as "literally rolling in wealth," [...more...] Such examples are easily come by, even in the works of the authors we are often told to emulate.' Given the caliber of authors that have used "literally" for emphasis, I have a hard time standing behind the concept that it's even poor style. We can decide that, moving forward, we'd like to clean up English and use "literally" differently, but calling it a mistake rather than a offense to modern style is inaccurate. REGARDLESS, I thought this was exactly the kind of thread that Hacker News hated. :|

giblfiz 14y ago

do you literally want me to kill you now?

pyre 14y ago

"...the US financial system was literally melting down." is probably better written as: "...the US financial system was seriously melting down." Adding literally is an attempt to make the statement stronger than just: "...the US financial system was melting down."

lifeisstillgood 14y ago

Literally kill you?