

Your protestations about “literally” are literally wrong - barretts
https://medium.com/i-m-h-o/1a82337f14a7

======
captainmuon
Oh god, this debate is getting old :-)

There are two ways to "misuse" "literally": \- You believe it means
"figuratively" or "metaphorically". Like: "The hyperloop is a revolutionary
technology, it is literally an iPhone". Using it in this way is plain wrong,
no matter if you are descriptionist or perscriptionist. "It doesn't mean what
you think it means." \- You use it as hyperbole. "I had such a hangover, my
head literally exploded". Well, it certainly didn't explode for real, it's
clear you're exaggerating. Everyone knows it's a metaphor, you just want to
reinforce it. a la "Really guys, it was almost as bad as if it really did
explode". This is not wrong, but people often don't get it (when they're smart
enough to know the difference, but don't pick up the hyperbole) (- Or you
could use it ironically and mix it up on purpose. However, people probably
won't get that either.)

------
Semiapies
Word definitions are determined by usage, sure.

Guess what, though? Usage is defined by _what people think is correct_ ,
including how they argue about that usage and what it "should" be.

If you embrace descriptivism, you don't get to reject prescriptive arguments
as "wrong" on the basis that _ZOMG, there are no rules_. It's like saying a
policy arguments is "wrong" because a poll reveals that people exist who don't
agree with that argument - you're not even talking in the right context.

Or, put another way, if enough people continue to spell "past" as "passed" ("I
went passed the sign..."), then eventually one of the definitions of "passed"
will include "alternate spelling of 'past'". But someone _isn 't wrong_ to
say, "That should be 'past', not 'passed'.", even if some people are spelling
it wrong.

------
lutusp
I wish people would stop using the word "wrong" in this context. Words may
have more than one meaning, and if people choose to use words that way, the
meanings are not wrong even when they contradict each other.

Example -- Joe says about Larry, "He's really a baaad dude." The appropriate
response is to determine the context of the remark, not assume the word is
being misused.

~~~
tankbot
You're making the same argument as the post, it's worth reading. He is saying
that telling people they can't use "literally" as an exaggeration is wrong
because words mean what you want them to.

He is also explaining that the dictionaries that have updated "literally" to
show this usage are not dictating anything, they merely reflect the way the
word is being commonly used.

~~~
lutusp
> You're making the same argument as the post, it's worth reading.

Yes, I know, I read it. My objection was only to the article's misleading
title.

------
pouzy
Makes me think about "Archer", they make a pretty good use of using it wrong.

------
jacalata
This is stunningly similar to the kind of scathing comebacks littering my 7th
grade diary. Thankfully, when I was 11 we didn't publish our snarky takedowns
online. This poor author will doubtless feel terrible when she grows up and
looks back on the drivel that was published under her name.

