
It's a Fact: Opinions Are Not Facts - kql27
http://thomaslarock.com/2013/02/its-a-fact-opinions-are-not-facts/
======
lutusp
The author missed a golden opportunity to point out that _most facts aren't
facts either_.

Example fact: the word "literally" means consistent with reality, not
exaggerated or fanciful. Is that what "literally" means -- yes or no? Let's
resolve this by looking up a dictionary definition:

<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literally>

Definition 1 : in a literal sense or manner : actually <took the remark
literally> <was literally insane>

Definition 2: in effect : virtually <will literally turn the world upside down
to combat cruelty or injustice — Norman Cousins>

Take you pick -- "literally" either means according to reality, or according
to the speaker's fancy.

Another example fact (something many people believe): "After a long losing
streak while gambling, statistics says my luck should improve." True or false?
It's false -- the above is called the "Gamber's Fallacy".

More here: <http://arachnoid.com/wrong/> ("Everything you know is Wrong")

~~~
TeamData
And yet that second definition came about due to incorrect usage of the term.
Or exaggerated usage of the term that others started using the term only as an
exaggeration.

So is "literally" as a virtual thing incorrect? Or new?

In my opinion, it's both.

~~~
lutusp
> And yet that second definition came about due to incorrect usage of the
> term.

But there are no "incorrect" usages of words. Dictionaries are supposed to
record how people use words, without judgment or rancor. Encyclopedias strive
for correctness, but dictionaries are only meant to find out, and report, how
people choose to use words.

In the old days of lexicography, scholars would find ten new uses of an
existing word, or of a new word, and that was the criterion, the threshold for
acceptance -- that new word, or that redefinition, was duly recorded. I think
that's still the standard by which words are discovered or redefined.

The tl;dr: Encylopedias prescribe, dictionaries describe.

> So is "literally" as a virtual thing incorrect?

Wrong question. I think the only fair question is -- does this usage cause
confusion? Well, yes, but since people use the word that way, what are you
going to do? People are in charge of language, not scholars in an ivory tower.

