7 ms·
Google's Definition of 'Literally'
- iancarroll 13y agoThey should just remove the first definition.
- a3voices 13y agoLanguages change over time. "Goodbye" originated from "God be with you", but I don't see anyone complaining about it.
- mjgoins 13y agoBut when "literally" means "figuratively", how do you express the concept that "literally" used to mean? You have to go out of your way to circumlocute, which is at least annoying, if nothing else.
- lutusp 13y agoThe alternative is for some "authority" to tell people what words mean, rather than ask them. This is not what dictionaries are for.
- _dps 13y agoI share your dislike for a central language authority, but I think there are non-authoritative solutions that are consistent with the missions and practices of dictionaries. One possibility: dictionaries could report that a large fraction of English experts or teachers consider a particular usage incorrect. This would be a dispassionate reporting of people's behavior as well. You may ask "How do you pick the experts?" Well, how did we pick the people whose diction the dictionary supposedly represents? :) We make do with approximations. I think that the OED could easily afford to sample 1000 English teachers ranging from professors to grade school, and ranging across many geographical regions and social strata. It would actually be fascinating data to see alongside a definition! Edit: I had meant to add that the sampling for the words need not happen for every (word, expert) combination; giving each instructor 1000 words chosen uniformly from a pool of 10,000 words should get you reasonable coverage for almost all of those 10,000 words. So the costs of this sampling experiment on both OED and the expert volunteers would be quite low.
- lutusp 13y ago> I share your dislike for a central language authority, but I think there are non-authoritative solutions that are consistent with the missions and practices of dictionaries. There are well-tested solutions. One is to have a language authority such as you suggest above, like the Académie française, which struggles against what it regards as erosions and distortions of proper French: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acad%C3%A9mie_fran%C3%A7aise http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acad%C3%A9mie_fran%C3%A7aise Another is simply to list definitions in the order of their contemporary preference, as dictionary.com does. Interestingly, Merriam-Webster uses the reverse order, listing the oldest definitions first, as in the case of "Decimated", which once meant reduced by one tenth but now means substantially destroyed: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/decimate http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/decimate http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/decimated http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/decimated Note the difference in listing order. > One possibility: dictionaries could report that a large fraction of English experts or teachers consider a particular usage incorrect. Apart from the problem of choosing experts, I think this would only slow the natural rate of language evolution. I think the problem is deeper -- it asks whether language is (or should be) susceptible to evolution by means of natural selection as people's tastes and needs change.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- leephillips 13y agoJust say "figuratively"; they will have swapped definitions.
- 100k 13y agoFigurative use of literally is somewhat annoying to me, but it's not the only English word with two opposite meanings. "Cleave" means both split apart and stick together. Edit: Maybe I should re-think my annoyance. Merriam Webster documents usage going back centuries. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ai_VHZq_7eU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ai_VHZq_7eU
- leephillips 13y agoIt seems one can not express the view that a dictionary made a mistake without someone helpfully pointing out that language changes (over time, even). We know that. We might know that, be well-behaved descriptivists, and yet still think that this definition is wrong. Because we don't think that an ignorant habit on the part of certain 14 year old girls means that the language has actually changed yet. It's a judgement call, and it might just be that displaying this definition shows poor judgement. That doesn't mean that it won't be justified in another 40 years or so.
- norswap 13y agoIf you think only 14 year old girls make this mistake, you're literally wrong.
- lutusp 13y ago> If you think only 14 year old girls make this mistake ... It's not a mistake -- people are free to use words any way they want. Also, the "literally" entry over a Merriam-Webster shows Norman Cousins using the word this way: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literally http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literally 2 : in effect : virtually <will literally turn the world upside down to combat cruelty or injustice — Norman Cousins> Language isn't a science, it's an art. This is an example of artistic freedom.
- leephillips 13y agoI hear you. I never really understood the meaning of "ironic" until the work of Alanis Morissette.
- lutusp 13y ago> It seems one can not express the view that a dictionary made a mistake ... But the dictionary didn't make a mistake. The word "literally" means what most people think, as well as its opposite. A dictionary's purpose is solely to report how people use words (it describes, it doesn't prescribe), and it got this use right. > It's a judgement call, and it might just be that displaying this definition shows poor judgement. That depends. Is this new definition out in the wild? Apparently so, in which case the listing is valid. Over at Webster's in the days of print, if a word was used with a particular meaning in ten recognized publications, it became official.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- lutusp 13y agoThis is not at all surprising. Other online dictionaries list both definitions as well, on the ground that a dictionary's purpose is to dispassionately report how people use words, not try to be consistent when people aren't consistent.
- D_Alex 13y agoCounterpoint, from http://theweek.com/article/index/241002/how-the-wrong-definition-of-literally-snuck-into-the-dictionary http://theweek.com/article/index/241002/how-the-wrong-defini... >Much to the chagrin of grammar-lovers everywhere, it turns out that this informal (and completely incorrect) use of "literally" has actually been added to three established dictionaries, as Reddit user andtheniansaid pointed out. ..."completely incorrect"...!
- kivikakk 13y ago"completely incorrect" is useless prescriptivism. They can call it incorrect all they like, it won't stop anyone.
- lutusp 13y agoBut more, it misunderstands a dictionary's purpose, which is to dispassionately list how people choose to use words.
- D_Alex 13y agoNot according to dictionary.com - that says that the purpose of the dictionary is to provide information on meaning and correct usage of the word. Also, Wikipedia refers to two types of dictionary: prescriptive and descriptive. But even the descriptive type should provide information on how the word is used, eg: "sometimes incorrectly used to mean 'figuratively'".
- lutusp 13y ago> Not according to dictionary.com - that says that the purpose of the dictionary is to provide information on meaning and correct usage of the word. Wait, think a minute. That description exactly corresponds with what I said. The "correct" usage of a word is precisely, exactly what the speaker thinks it means, at that moment in time. If a dictionary listed a definition that was not in use by anyone, that would be different -- that would be incorrect. > Also, Wikipedia refers to two types of dictionary: prescriptive and descriptive. Yes, and there are no prescriptive dictionaries, at least not in English. The French have one, created by the Académie française: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acad%C3%A9mie_fran%C3%A7aise http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acad%C3%A9mie_fran%C3%A7aise Apart from the French example, it seems telling people how to use words has fallen out of fashion, giving way to another example of evolution by natural selection.
- barnabask 13y agoWhen I literally want to use the word "literally" literally, I will now say "non-figuratively", as in "I non-figuratively cannot believe it's come to this."
- pragmar 13y agoThe misuse of the term seems to date back three centuries, and has been abused for literary effect by many notable authors, including F. Scott Fitzgerald, Mark Twain, Jane Austin and Luisa May Alcott. So it seems perfectly acceptable to use the second definition with a wink, casually letting your audience know you know they know. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check-with-polly-curtis/2012/mar/12/reality-check-literally-wrong-use-word http://www.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check-with-polly...
- thenewway 13y agoSo if a tree falls in the forest literally, does it?
- gizmo686 13y agoOf course the tree falls into the forest literally. The correct question is does it actually [fall in the forest].
- jasomill 13y agohttp://xkcd.com/1108/ http://xkcd.com/1108/
- D_Alex 13y agoEh.., I'll put in the Urban Dictionary's definition, for reference: literally : used to describe something that actually happens or exists. A much misused adverb, often for emphasis. People often confuse this word with figuratively. "I literally died of embarrassment." "Really? How was reincarnation, you illiterate dipshit?"
- shurcooL 13y agoOn my way home yesterday, I thought I'd invent a new natural language. The definition of what is valid, legal would be simple: if 80% of English speaking population understands it, then it's legal. So typos and stuff like this would not be considered a mistake. THere fore the FolloWing wouldz bee valid alsoo. But then I'd have to define what it means to speak English, which would require a lot of complex rules, etc. Then I thought it would be pointless, as it wouldn't matter if I wrote this down or not. People would still understand each other and go on about their lives.
- JasonSage 13y agoYou, sir, just made my night.
- glomph 13y agoThis has been true of the word 'literally' for hundreds of years. People seem to have coped. Pedants have just become more vocal since the internet.