If I say “literally everyone in our section ducked” I don’t mean “most people in our section ducked”. It’s how I would communicate that every single person ducked.
But now, thanks to people like you, when I say “literally everyone in our section ducked” listeners won’t know what I’m trying to communicate. Am I using the word correctly, in which case I mean everyone ducked? Or am I using the word sloppily as a pointless intensifier, in which case I might mean most people ducked. Or some people ducked. Or nobody ducked.
Yes, I can see how this new usage has improved the language.
No, the word “literally” works well enough. If what follows “literally” is a hyperbolic statement, it is being used as an intensifier. If what follows “literally” is a play on an idiom or something that is plausible, it is being used in the literal sense. See:
I am so hungry, I can literally eat a horse. (Intensifier)
The lion was so hungry, he literally ate a horse. (Literal)
He was literally glowing after reading the letter from his wife. (Intensifier.)
He was literally glowing after falling into the vat of phosphorescent chemicals. (Literal.)
I’ve never heard of anyone actually being confused by “literally” and how it is being used. Speaking of “actually”–that and “really” are used in the same way, when what follows is neither “actual” or “for real.” Why aren’t the pedants up in arms for those usages of the word?
Really? The only context I ever see quarterly used is in business and it most definitely has a specific, invariable meaning.
I get the whole “language changes” argument (sort of) but I guess I don’t quite grasp why, in a case such as this when the word in question literally means the opposite of what the speaker is trying to convey. It’s not like it’s a complex word. So someone used it incorrectly once and no one else knew the correct definition and just followed suit?
That’s the trouble with ‘literally’. If you say “Everyone in our section ducked” I’d think maybe it wasn’t every single person because of the way ‘everyone’ is used commonly. But to then emphasize it with ‘literally’ when something else is meant increases the cloudiness. If it doesn’t mean literally in that case then what happens to ‘everyone’? It could have meant every single person, or maybe every person the speaker noticed, or someone didn’t duck but it’s hardly worth mentioning. So now you further qualify it with ‘literally’ and the odds are that means ‘figuratively’, is that fewer people ducking or more?
“Literally” originally meant that an event that’s usually an expression actually occurred. “It’s literally raining cats and dogs” meant cats and dogs are actually falling from the sky.
The ignorant masses have since corrupted the word because they think it makes them sound intelligent. Stupid ignorant masses.
The misuse of literally is not the same as words like cleave or sanction having two opposing meanings. That may be confusing but the words mean something in both their uses.
Literally isn’t used like this. It has a correct meaning. And now it has a non-meaning.
When somebody says something like “It’s literally raining cats and dogs” then, assuming animals are not falling out of the sky, the word literally has no meaning in this sentence. It was just added because the speaker wanted more syllables in their statement. “It’s literally raining cats and dogs” has the same meaning as “It’s phantasmagorically raining cats and dogs” or “It’s multisyllabically raining cats and dogs” or “It’s gastrostomatically raining cats and dogs”. It’s just people randomly throwing a big word they don’t understand into a sentence.
If people use “literally” to mean “figuratively” and the dictionary didn’t include that definition, then the dictionary is wrong. The purpose of a dictionary is to record the definitions of words. Period. If you don’t like a definition, tough beans. You don’t get to dictate.
The OED gives examples of “literally” being used as “figuratively” since 1769. It even says that this is one of the most common definitions of the word. They would not be doing their job if they left out one of the most common definitions of any word. What should they do? Put their fingers in their ears and say “nah, nah, nah I can’t hear you” when someone uses it that way?
People get all huffy about this, but the usage has not caused anyone any trouble in communication in the past two centuries.
No, the “incorrect” use of “literally” is the same as its correct meaning, you, the listener, are just supposed to recognize that it is essentially a lie used for effect. In cases where it modifies what is already a lie used for effect it is just further intensifying the lie, but you are still expected to see through it.
Example:
“It’s raining cats and dogs” means it’s raining hard but not actually raining cats and dogs.
“It’s literally raining cats and dogs” means it’s raining SO hard that the usual cats and dogs phrase is inadequate for conveying just how hard the rain is coming down, so the phrase is taken up a notch by exaggerating the lie by suggesting that it’s not a lie at all. However the listener is still expected to be intelligent enough to identify that this is still a lie.
Note that in the cats and dogs example, the words “cats” and “dogs” still mean the small furry companion animals we like to keep as pets and “literally” still means “the following words are true” but we are expected to realise that all three words are part of an elaborate lie designed to let you know just how much rain is falling.
I think it’s generally clear from context in what sense “literally” is being used. For example, if I were to say, “my head literally exploded”, I think you would agree that there would be some additional external cues that might indicate whether or not the statement was true.
Never said I use it, but merely that I understand the usage as described.
It’s super-pedantic to get your underwear in a twist about this; it just doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things. Clearly some people are using it in a metaphorical sense, and others are using it in a strictly factual sense.
Really? The only context I ever see quarterly used is in business and it most definitely has a specific, invariable meaning.