Misuse of the word 'literally'

[Wyke Red]

 

[atypical_boro]

Remember Jamie Redknapp on Sky doing his punditry and I can’t remember who he was on about but said “he’s literally ran himself into the ground”. Nice one Jamie.

It was 'he's literally as fast as lightning' about Michael Owen.

 

[ThirdLeg]

I think I said that exact same thing in far simpler terms a few posts ago, didn't I?

you did but had not when I opened the thread!

 

[grumpyoldgit]

Language is fluid. It evolves over the years There's no point in getting worked up about it. Just makes you sound like a grumpy old git. No offence meant to you there grumpyoldgit.

None taken.

 

[Laughing]

Thankfully, no one born prior to 1980 has ever said anything inappropriate

The apparent misuse of "Literally" does not present a barrier to effective communication. In fact, "the kids" seem to understand its use in this context. It is therefore, in my view of language, a valid use of the term.

Of course you may view things differently. But very few of us exhibit perfect grammar. We are simply unware or ignorant of the many ways in which we break the rules.

Just as we might look down on those that deploy literally for emphasis, there are those that take a dim view of our approach to the language.

I don't think the op was meant to be taken literally

 

[atypical_boro]

Yeah the Millennials get a bad rap don't they, I wonder how long before people start properly going to town on Gen-Z, they can't even remember 9/11!

If only you boomers and Gen X-ers were as perfect as us Xennials.

 

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

Thankfully, no one born prior to 1980 has ever said anything inappropriate

The apparent misuse of "Literally" does not present a barrier to effective communication. In fact, "the kids" seem to understand its use in this context. It is therefore, in my view of language, a valid use of the term.

Of course you may view things differently. But very few of us exhibit perfect grammar. We are simply unware or ignorant of the many ways in which we break the rules.

Just as we might look down on those that deploy literally for emphasis, there are those that take a dim view of our approach to the language.

But using literally incorrectly isn't a misuse of grammar is it? It's literally misunderstanding what the word means. I think youve probably given the mostest wrong example of grammar ive ever seen there.

 

[bumface]

None taken.

Glad to hear it. All about the free play of signifiers, innit mate? Safe man. Respect.

 

[bumface]

But using literally incorrectly isn't a misuse of grammar is it? It's literally misunderstanding what the word means. I think youve probably given the mostest wrong example of grammar ive ever seen there.

Most linguists would disagree with you. Words become what the majority of people think they mean over time.

 

[Scubahood]

Who put 20p in you, bumface?!

 

[A]

What's wrong with real words like "wizard" or "happening", I miss that

 

[bumface]

Who put 20p in you, bumface?!

That's a really personal question Scuba and frankly none of your business. How rude.

 

[bumface]

What's wrong with real words like "wizard" or "happening", I miss that

They were the best words, weren't they? I really miss those days too.

 

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

Most linguists would disagree with you. Words become what the majority of people think they mean over time.

But it's, literally still not grammar though; is it? And the majority of people don't use literally incorrectly, just the thick ones. We probably are getting thicker and thicker as a society mind, judging by the questions on bullseye. Soon we'll just be grunting and pointing at things.

 

[bumface]

Soon we'll just be grunting and pointing at things.

The eternal language of all teenagers everywhere.

 

[JackG]

If

Most linguists would disagree with you. Words become what the majority of people think they mean over time.

If majority means what I think it means I don't think we've quite reached that stage yet.

 

[bumface]

If

If majority means what I think it means I don't think we've quite reached that stage yet.

But most people understand that it can be used to mean two completely opposite things depending on the person using it. It doesn't completely baffle people when they hear it being 'misused' because they still know exactly what that person meant. Both meanings will slip in to the dictionary definition eventually. That's just how language works. If language didn't evolve then we'd still all be speaking like Chaucer.

 

[Centralscrutinizer]

But most people understand that it can be used to mean two completely opposite things depending on the person using it. It doesn't completely baffle people when they hear it being 'misused' because they still know exactly what that person meant. Both meanings will slip in to the dictionary definition eventually. That's just how language works. If language didn't evolve then we'd still all be speaking like Chaucer.

I'm getting confused now, and I mean literally. Am I right in thinking literally can mean the opposite of literally or are you speaking figuratively ?

 

[JackG]

But most people understand that it can be used to mean two completely opposite things depending on the person using it. It doesn't completely baffle people when they hear it being 'misused' because they still know exactly what that person meant. Both meanings will slip in to the dictionary definition eventually. That's just how language works. If language didn't evolve then we'd still all be speaking like Chaucer.

I fully accept that language evolves. I'm wondering what happens if we do reach the point where the majority use literally to mean metaphorically. What word should the Old Skool use when they literally want to say 'literally'?

 

[bumface]

I'm getting confused now, and I mean literally. Am I right in thinking literally can mean the opposite of literally or are you speaking figuratively ?

I fully accept that language evolves. I'm wondering what happens if we do reach the point where the majority use literally to mean metaphorically. What word should the Old Skool use when they literally want to say 'literally'?

Both meanings would still be in use and you'd probably just have to rely on common sense and context to interpret which the speaker was intending to convey in any given example. Plenty of younger people already use that particular word to mean both literally or figuratively anyway and that'll just be formalised eventually. But I've derailed and ruined Scuba's thread enough here so I'll shut up about this now. Carry on with the whole ridiculing youngsters stuff lads. I'm just being a d1ck here, Sorry Scubes.