3 ms·
Curious why such a specific time period. Is there a source for 1680s? The 17th century would probably be sufficient otherwise.
by clebio 14y ago
Curious why such a specific time period. Is there a source for 1680s? The 17th century would probably be sufficient otherwise.
- joshAg 14y agoOED has the source if you have access to it, which I don't or I would provide it here.
- saraid216 14y agohttp://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=literally&allowed_in_frame=0 http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=literally&allow... Etymonline does not reproduce the OED, but it does source from it and sometimes you get lucky.
- clebio 14y agoThanks for the link! It's fairly interesting, too. That citation specifically reads: 'Erroneously used in reference to metaphors, hyperbole, etc., even by writers like Dryden and Pope, to indicate "what follows must be taken in the strongest admissible sense" (1680s), which is opposite to the word's real meaning.' So for one, it states clearly 'erroneously used' (and indeed has this specific wording, 'strongest admissible sense'). Further, gives the 1680 number, but doesn't actually source that any further (general writing periods of Dryden and Pope? Perhaps, though not clear). Anyway, that's fun. I miss the OED, but it's the sort of massive tome that's impractical to always have on hand.