Literally?!

[Kalinychta]

So perhaps the good old-fashioned concept of irony may explain some of the turnarounds in the meanings of words?

"Salubrious" technically means healthy. But in my student days, "salubrious" meant some crummy rat-infested joint that not even a syphilitic rat would pay rent on. And it may yet come to pass that "salubrious" ultimately begins to mean the opposite of its original self, if this once sardonic slang gains sufficient traction.

Very true. Irony and subtlety and humor. That’s funny...ironic usage eventually kills itself by redefining the word to mean the thing that made it ironic in the first place. I like that.

But I still maintain that there’s a huge difference between that and epidemic misusage because some IQ-zero starlet literally like for real kind of literally couldn’t believe it, riiiiiiight?

 

[Fino]

Context disambiguates the meaning, at least most of the time.

Why does this logic not apply to "literally"?

But I still maintain that there’s a huge difference between that and epidemic misusage because some IQ-zero starlet literally like for real kind of literally couldn’t believe it, riiiiiiight?

Is this a real origin story you've been referencing or just a humorous guess?

 

[Progster]

All examples given are subject to gradation, and I believe "kind of" refers to it being on the lower end of the scale.

Kind of, or kinda, definitely has a legitimate use, my point is that it gets over-used, some people use it in just about every sentence and next to every adjective, to the point that I notice it and it begins to bug me.

Wasn't there an ancient Greek noun which could mean either "stranger" or "friend"?

Was it Xenia?

ξένος. Modern Greek, too.

 

[Juliettaa]

We are such slobs nowadays.

In more ways than one!

 

[Fino]

Kind of, or kinda, definitely has a legitimate use, my point is that it gets over-used, some people use it in just about every sentence and next to every adjective, to the point that I notice it and it begins to bug me.

Oh! I apologize. I was under the impression you believed it made no sense under any circumstance, which did surprise me that you said it so I'm not that surprised that I misunderstood. And I agree.

 

[Kalinychta]

Why does this logic not apply to "literally"? Is this a real origin story you've been referencing or just a humorous guess?

Because I said so.

Just kidding.

I see what you mean, but I think that context disambiguates the meaning/misuse of "literally" only in the sense that it reveals the misuse. When I hear someone say, for example, "I literally slept until noon," after I've rolled the sentence around in my head and concluded that there's no reason why it wouldn't be taken literally, I then understand that it's being misused and that what the person means is actually, not literally. So I mean, it's just a big mess. It causes ambiguity and confusion. And when someone actually does mean something literally (correct usage), he may very well be misunderstood as meaning actually or figuratively, because the real meaning of literally has been buried (or, I suspect, never known in the first place by a lot of people). It's a bit of a boy-who-cried-wolf type of situation. It creates confusion. Language shouldn't be confusing.

As a matter of fact, I recall reading that the modern epidemic misuse of "literally" can be traced to the Kardashian girls (from their television show). It's like this: after World War I, a guy called Edward Bernays (he was Freud's nephew, actually) hired a number of fashionable young women to smoke cigarettes while marching in a televised Easter parade in New York City. (Up to that point, cigarettes were viewed as phallic symbols,--i.e. symbols of male power,--so it was regarded as gross and wrong for women to smoke them because, you know, men didn't want women getting any ideas about power and freedom and such.) The next day, cigarette sales exploded. Women started smoking like crazy. Likewise, when Kim Kardashian says, "I like, toooootally like, literally can't even like, remember what I was about to literally like, kind of say, you know, riiiiiight?" then a large number of people think: "Kim Kardashian is famous --> she's fashionable and a sex symbol --> I want to be famous, fashionable, and a sex symbol --> I'm going to speak the way she speaks." (Actually they don't consciously think that--it happens in the unconscious mind... Freud again.) So they do start speaking like her...and the people who don't care about Kim Kardashian hear the Kardashian clones saying "literally" incorrectly, not knowing that it originated from Kim's misuse, and their unconscious minds say: "Everyone's saying 'literally' all the time now --> They're misusing it --> But I want to fit in --> I'm going to say 'literally' all the time now, too."

[I had to edit this, because the top part didn't make sense in some places. Sorry...I'm only halfway through my cup of coffee this morning...]

 

[Fino]

Because I said so.

Just kidding.

Context disambiguates the meaning/misuse of "literally" only in the sense that it reveals the misuse. When I hear someone say, for example, "I literally slept until noon," after I've rolled the sentence around in my head and concluded that there's no reason why it wouldn't be taken literally, I then understand that it's being misused and that what the person means is actually, not literally. Like when someone says, "I just seen this guy go by in a car," I understand from the context that he misused the word "seen" and that what he meant was "saw"--I understand his meaning, but that doesn't make using seen in place of saw correct.

In the case of literally, when someone actually does mean something literally (correct usage), everyone's going to think he means actually or figuratively. It's a bit of a boy-who-cried-wolf type of situation. And it creates confusion. Language shouldn't be confusing.

As a matter of fact, I recall reading that the modern epidemic misuse of "literally" can be traced to the Kardashian girls (from their television show). It's like this: after World War I, a guy called Edward Bernays (he was Freud's nephew, actually) hired a number of fashionable young women to smoke cigarettes while marching in a televised Easter parade in New York City. (Up to that point, cigarettes were viewed as phallic symbols,--i.e. symbols of male power,--so it was regarded as gross and wrong for women to smoke them because, you know, men didn't want women getting any ideas about power and freedom and such.) The next day, cigarette sales exploded. Women started smoking like crazy. Likewise, when Kim Kardashian says, "I like, toooootally like, literally can't even like, remember what I was about to literally like, kind of say, you know, riiiiiight?" then a large number of people think: "Kim Kardashian is famous --> she's fashionable and a sex symbol --> I want to be famous, fashionable, and a sex symbol --> I'm going to speak the way she speaks." (Actually they don't consciously think that--it happens in the unconscious mind... Freud again.) So they do start speaking like her...and the people who don't care about Kim Kardashian hear the Kardashian fans saying "literally" incorrectly, not knowing that it originated from Kim's misuse, and their unconscious minds say: "Everyone's saying 'literally' all the time now --> They're misusing it --> But I want to fit in --> I'm going to say 'literally' all the time now, too."

It seems to me that being able to understand when it's being misused means that there isn't any confusion. The only reason using "seen" in place of "saw" isn't correct is because it isn't correct. It could be, but it's not. When "literally" is identified as being misused in the same way, simply replace "misused" with "figurative" and you're good. I somehow don't see it as a common scenario that people would use "literally" in a context that could be literal but is meant to be figurative. And since people, as we've recognized, have already been using it figuratively, you either have been missing people's meanings or it's not actually confusing at all. But judging by your annoyance at improper usage, I'm guessing you're perfectly capable at discerning each usage.

 

[Kalinychta]

It seems to me that being able to understand when it's being misused means that there isn't any confusion. The only reason using "seen" in place of "saw" isn't correct is because it isn't correct. It could be, but it's not. When "literally" is identified as being misused in the same way, simply replace "misused" with "figurative" and you're good. I somehow don't see it as a common scenario that people would use "literally" in a context that could be literal but is meant to be figurative. And since people, as we've recognized, have already been using it figuratively, you either have been missing people's meanings or it's not actually confusing at all. But judging by your annoyance at improper usage, I'm guessing you're perfectly capable at discerning each usage.

Sorry, I had to edit the part about "seen" and "saw" out and change some other things. The problem with the misuse is that it contradicts the actual meaning of the word. When someone says "literally," having to sit there and think about if they mean literally as in literally or literally as in figuratively doesn't make sense. If you mean literally, then say literally. If you mean figuratively, then don't say anything (because figuratively is already implied). If we use literally to mean figuratively, then literally loses its meaning. It cancels itself out. And when someone uses it correctly, his meaning won't be clear.

 

[Fino]

Sorry, I had to edit the part about "seen" and "saw" out and change some other things. The problem with the misuse is that it contradicts the actual meaning of the word. When someone says "literally," having to sit there and think about if they mean literally as in literally or literally as in figuratively doesn't make sense. If you mean literally, then say literally. If you mean figuratively, then don't say anything (because figuratively is already implied). If we use literally to mean figuratively, then literally loses its meaning. It cancels itself out. And when someone uses it correctly, his meaning won't be clear.

It's too bad you edited those parts out, because I don't have an argument for this one, which is why I never responded to it LOL

 

[Kalinychta]

It's too bad you edited those parts out, because I don't have an argument for this one, which is why I never responded to it LOL

HA! My seen-versus-saw comparison was funny. I swear, we should start calling coffee "liquid brain"...I can't think straight in the morning until I've poured at least a cup of it down my throat.

 

[Fino]

HA! My seen-versus-saw comparison was funny. I swear, we should start calling coffee "liquid brain"...I can't think straight in the morning until I've poured at least a cup of it down my throat.

It's okay! I enjoy arguments for which I immediately have a counter-argument.

 

[Streetwise]

Because I said so.

Just kidding.

I see what you mean, but I think that context disambiguates the meaning/misuse of "literally" only in the sense that it reveals the misuse. When I hear someone say, for example, "I literally slept until noon," after I've rolled the sentence around in my head and concluded that there's no reason why it wouldn't be taken literally, I then understand that it's being misused and that what the person means is actually, not literally. So I mean, it's just a big mess. It causes ambiguity and confusion. And when someone actually does mean something literally (correct usage), he may very well be misunderstood as meaning actually or figuratively, because the real meaning of literally has been buried (or, I suspect, never known in the first place by a lot of people). It's a bit of a boy-who-cried-wolf type of situation. It creates confusion. Language shouldn't be confusing.

As a matter of fact, I recall reading that the modern epidemic misuse of "literally" can be traced to the Kardashian girls (from their television show). It's like this: after World War I, a guy called Edward Bernays (he was Freud's nephew, actually) hired a number of fashionable young women to smoke cigarettes while marching in a televised Easter parade in New York City. (Up to that point, cigarettes were viewed as phallic symbols,--i.e. symbols of male power,--so it was regarded as gross and wrong for women to smoke them because, you know, men didn't want women getting any ideas about power and freedom and such.) The next day, cigarette sales exploded. Women started smoking like crazy. Likewise, when Kim Kardashian says, "I like, toooootally like, literally can't even like, remember what I was about to literally like, kind of say, you know, riiiiiight?" then a large number of people think: "Kim Kardashian is famous --> she's fashionable and a sex symbol --> I want to be famous, fashionable, and a sex symbol --> I'm going to speak the way she speaks." (Actually they don't consciously think that--it happens in the unconscious mind... Freud again.) So they do start speaking like her...and the people who don't care about Kim Kardashian hear the Kardashian clones saying "literally" incorrectly, not knowing that it originated from Kim's misuse, and their unconscious minds say: "Everyone's saying 'literally' all the time now --> They're misusing it --> But I want to fit in --> I'm going to say 'literally' all the time now, too."

[I had to edit this, because the top part didn't make sense in some places. Sorry...I'm only halfway through my cup of coffee this morning...]

I'm starting to get confused I must be tired I actually thought the far end of the fart and which way it blows

 

[Bronzelincolns]

it's an expression..

 

[grommet]

A story I heard once. An English professor was describing grammar. A negative modifier always makes a negative statement. A positive modifier always makes a positive statement. Two negatives can make a positive, but there is no situation in which two positives can make a negative. To which a student replied "Yeah, right!"

That is very very funny, thank you

 

[Gracey]

Is the word literally being used for emphasis?
In one example given,

"My head exploded"
"My head literally exploded"

we know there are certain situations where a human head could explode and should that have happened, literally,
they wouldn't be around to tell us about it.

I the absence of other descriptions to emphasise what was going on in their mind or head
(perhaps they themselves didn't know or understand)
to use the phrase "My head literally exploded"
may go someway toward emphasising the intensity of what they experienced?

 

[musicalman]

Meh, I think this confusion surrounding the word literally is more of a wish to make something literal or a feeling that something may somehow be literal, rather than a deliberate move to misuse or confuse it with something figurative.

Here's an example: Just today I was trying to sort out a computer issue. I don't remember the below scenario actually happening, but I'll pretend it did, since it'll make it easier for me to explain.

Things weren't going well and I was getting frustrated. I was talking to a friend throughout this process and I said, "If this doesn't work I'm literally going to pick this tower up and throw it out the window." Now, I've never once thrown a tower out a window, and never plan to, so yes, what I said is figurative. But as a person who often considers outlandish things, and who is somewhat impulsive, I can't help but consider what it would feel like to heft a big tower like mine and chuck it. I'd never literally do it, but for that split second, I literally want to, and I want people to know that I am literally so mad I'm pondering it. Perhaps it would be correct for me to say "I literally want to..." and incorrect for me to say "I am literally going to..." but to be completely honest I think that point is moot when you consider that we all say we're going to do things that never get done.

In a perfect world, saying you'll literally do something, or that something is literally happening, would mean that it actually is. But I think when you get down to it, literal and figurative are not that far apart sometimes, especially when you are considering something which is potentially possible, but not likely to happen. Furthermore I think using the word literally in informal language is sort of a compensatory measure to make up for the fact that people often say things they don't mean. Using literally is done to give a figurative point additional emphasis. It may still be figurative, but more vivid than the normal figurative point would've been. When I use literally, or when I hear it being used, I interpret it as the point being more serious than I initially thought.

Convoluted I know, but it's the best I can come up with while still making some sense.

 

[Gracey]

I think for me,
the over use thus dilution and change of meaning for terms can rattle me.

Hearing someone describe themselves as 'depressed' when it's likely they may be just bored and becoming frustrated.

Hearing someone state "Oh my god, I had a full on melt down !"
to mean they perhaps reached a stage of feeling flustered. confused. But that's as far as it went.

And claiming "I've got OCD !" because they like things a bit tidy.
Get pleasure from a job well done in terms of organisation and completing a task to high standard, easily.

 

[Marmot]

-Enough said....

 

[Kalinychta]

I think for me,
the over use thus dilution and change of meaning for terms can rattle me.

Hearing someone describe themselves as 'depressed' when it's likely they may be just bored and becoming frustrated.

Hearing someone state "Oh my god, I had a full on melt down !"
to mean they perhaps reached a stage of feeling flustered. confused. But that's as far as it went.

And claiming "I've got OCD !" because they like things a bit tidy.
Get pleasure from a job well done in terms of organisation and completing a task to high standard, easily.

I know, what’s with all the hyperbole and dramatics? Other ones that get to me are “awesome” and “epic.” Everything is awesome and epic nowadays. Move over, Beowulf.

 

[Kalinychta]

-Enough said....

HAHAHAHA!!!!! This is hilarious!!!