Since it’s widely accepted that the word “literally” can be used to add emphasis, we need another word that can be used when you want to make it clear that you really mean “literally” in the original sense.
The word you’re looking for is “literally.”
Wait until you find out where the word very comes from.
Verily the veritas may surprise you.
Edit: and literally does not even literally mean “opposite of figuratively” — it literally means “by the letter” — as in literature — as any literate person knows.
I may be a little amused by it, but not verily surprised.
Its a very bemusing experience ;)
I am nonplussed.
The word they’re looking for literally is “literally”.
Yeah, literally
Not metaphorically
Unfortunately Merriam-Webster disagrees.
If you feel that it’s unfortunate, why take their side? I’ve found that no confusion is caused by using it the correct way. If any might be, it is at least in service of a noble cause.
Language evolves and, more ever than Merriam-Webster, the speakers and writers get to decide what words mean. While that does apply to you not wanting it mean that, you are swimming against the current in this case.
Swimming against the current is how all social progress is made.
That is beautiful
Linguistic drift happens over generations, this is just illiteracy
Right, I’m aware of this and see nothing wrong with it.
Dictionary compilation is descriptive, not prescriptive.
They don’t “disagree” with anyone. They just report on how words are being used.
You can’t get into an argument with a dictionary, no matter how hard you try.
- Mirriam-webster isn’t a great dictionary. It’s in the name.
- Dictionaries don’t say what’s correct; only what’s popular.
It would be subject to the same fate.
you beat me to it in fewer words
Reminds me of biohazard symbols, they need to be recognisable but only used for their intended purpose.
https://99percentinvisible.org/article/biohazard-symbol-designed-to-be-memorable-but-meaningless/
Trying to proscribe a particular usage is a doomed effort. You may as well literally command the tides to turn back. You’re really tilting at windmills. It’s seriously like mocking a clown. It’s exponentially harder than…
no, wait, we can still save “exponentially”! It doesn’t just mean a lot! It has important properties that differentiate it from linear or polynomial systems that make predicting outcomes-
small, linguistic drowning noises
EDIT: small, linguistic surfacing noises
I thought of another one, rational used to just mean “possible to express as a ratio” before it got co-opted by the academic-industrial complex-
smaller, somehow more pathetic linguistic drowning noises
Thanks for the support, fellow windmill tilter.
In truth, I just came to accept that change is inevitable. Now I got my phonetic floaties, my reading goggles, and a literal (middle english definition) inner tube, and I just see where the current takes me.
I think the lesson to learn here is that it is easier to kill a word by adding a new meaning than by policing how other people use it.
Eradicating a colloquial definition is like eradicating a virus, except anyone can crack open an old book at any time and revive it with their mind. I’m sure there are some meanings that have truly died i.e. there are no surviving records of them on earth, but they sure seem resilient. That’s before considering that the circumstances that give rise to one meaning might easily reoccur and cause the same meaning to rise again, perhaps under a new name. Sort of a convergent evolution for words, if you will.
I think the best we can hope to do is nudge words into more useful meanings, and create new words when our old words get overloaded.
rational used to just mean "possible to express as a ratio before it got co-opted by the academic-industrial complex- "
Hmmm… when you say “academic” do you mean the Academy of ancient Greece? Because I’m guessing that’s around when that mix-up first happened.
Now that I think about it I’m less sure that it was such a mistake. A rational number is one that can be expressed as a fraction, so the full number is expressible (vs irrational numbers which can only be approximated or represented as symbols, like PI. I think). If an idea is “rational”, then the whole idea (all the antecedents and the conclusion) is expressible in a logical system, whereas an “irrational” idea can’t be expressed as a logical structure. I think “rational” as a shorthand for “has a finite logical definition” is pretty reasonable.
I just looked it up, and according to wikipedia I have it backwards, the number groups were named “rational” and “irrational” according to whether they were sayable or unsayable, which makes sense. Though one of the references in that section is just to… a guy on stackexchange paraphrasing what he read in the OED, so not sure I’m buying that page 100%. More research is needed.
I literally only use “literally” when I literally mean “literally”.
Godspeed
Thank you
Bless you
i have a vague idea (that i can’t prove) that people have started using ‘objectively’ for this purpose. i also think this is hastening objectively towards the same fate as literally. there is objectively nothing that can be done about this
The word “unironically” also seems to be serving a similar function
I’ve been liking “explicitly”
Welcome to languages, where the definitions aren’t static, and the meanings change over time.
This is brought to you by the word angnail. Yes angnail, not hangnail. Okay fine it’s hangnail now.
Change is expected and important.
The word literal is an equally important job to do.
It’s fine to make literal not mean literal, but then instead of needing a word that means not literal, we’re gonna need a word that means literal.
Alright, guess maybe it becomes literally literal or not literally literal.
Come to think of it, maybe we should just say not literally literal for things that aren’t actually literal and are just intending to be emphasized.
Linguistic drift happens over generations, this is just illiteracy
So you mean, if this use of ‘literally’ had been around for, say, several centuries, you’d consider it acceptable?
Lol still no, the article you linked makes it clear that in all that time the situation hasn’t changed at all, the primary definition is the same and the secondary usage is the same and the criticism is the same
Your comment was purely about these changes taking generations to happen, this is something that has been in the work since the 18th century. It’s a perfectly typical change, not a sudden one based in illiteracy.
No, this is something that has not changed at all since the 18th century, learn to read
You are so confidently incorrect and unable to recognize your error. I invite you to re-read the whole article. This is a use that first surfaced in the 18th century and has slowly become more common, with an adoption peak recently. That’s how languages evolve.
In any case, definitely not about illiteracy, which, once again, is your original claim.
Gain some maturity.
The primary definition is unchanged for several centuries, the secondary definition has always been secondary and is more controversial than ever, if anything it seems pretty obvious that any linguistic drift occurring is in the opposite direction of your preference. I’m right and I’m winning, cope.
All we can do is use the word correctly, and maybe, if you feel like it, correct other’s use of it.
We’ve nearly lost “envy”, and hundreds of other words due to people using words incorrectly. But, as we all know, language is as alive as the people who use it, and it changes right along with us.
A more interesting story, to me, is the discovery that we’re all talking less and less:
Psychologists discovered that, since 2005, the average person has spoken less each year than the year before, by approximately 338 fewer words per day.
correct other’s use of it.
In practical terms, that just pisses off your friends :(
Guess they’d better start using the word correctly
Would you rather be right or have friends? That’s the tradeoff I’ve seen
I’d rather have friends that aren’t stupid, barring that I’d be happy to accept friends who are maybe not the smartest but are willing to make small efforts to accomodate their friends even when they don’t necessarily understand the logic behind the request. Quality over quantity.
“Like actually literally, for realz”
Best that I can do is, “non-figuratively.” As in, “The power of the hurricane winds non-figuratively blew me away.”
That non-figuratively rolls right off the tongue :D
“No cap fr fr”
it’s widely accepted that the word “literally” can be used to add emphasis
You found the root cause.
The solution is vicious heckling of idiots who misuse it - treat them like a middle-school drop-out - until they fix their behavior. Do the same for people who pluralize mass nouns as well: trainings, supports (not used like struts), emails.
I tried that with “irony”. People don’t give a fuck, they just want to randomly use words to seem smart.
Make them feel dumb when you catch them at it
People who don’t feel very dumb and just use random words aren’t shamed by telling them they are dumb for using random words.
They just come back at you with the old speech “did you know language evolves 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔”
Linguistic drift happens over generations, that’s just illiteracy, and if they’re too stupid to feel shame they definitely don’t know anything about that anyway
Are you enjoying this conversation with yourself LOL
Lol just fyi you’re not me, if I were having a conversation with myself it wouldn’t be half as stupid as this
Sometimes the best way to show something as real is to say it plainly.
“They literally flew to Boston”
“They seriously flew to Boston”
“They actually flew to Boston”
Vs
“They flew to Boston”
Isn’t that just figuratively?
I guess OP is asking the opposite question. Renaming original literally with a new word instead of replacing current slang word literally
It is
Had to scroll down 40 posts before this appeared.
Literally?
No, actually 32.
Archer made it acceptable to say too so you dont just sound like a grammar nerd
I Absolutely agree. It’s Totally absurd, we Really need a new word.
I propose “dictionarily”.
I’m against a new word, but I like this word
Yes, that’s why it bothers me that word “literally” is used for emphasis. I don’t care how long it’s been used that way, it robs the word of utility. The whole point of the word was to clarify that you mean literally when your words might otherwise be interpreted as figurative. Shit like this is why I’m unsure if people around me understand that I’m not exaggerating about the Untied States becoming a legitimate dictatorship committing holocaust level atrocities. I don’t know how to communicate when I mean something literally and be sure people understand that I mean it literally and am not exaggerating
The word has been enshitified.
