Hacker News Reader

Comment by spacemaus | Hacker News Reader

As a recovering language curmudgeon, it literally kills me that "literally" is now an auto-antonym too [1].

[1] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_eng...

I actually disagree with the dictionary there. In my experience (and admittedly my sample is limited), no one intends "literally" to weaken or to make it clear that their usage is figurative. I think use of "literally" applied to something obviously not literal is just another example of hyperbole.

That doesn't actually disagree with the dictionary text linked in grandparent post [0], though it disagrees with the apparent interpretation of it by the post that linked it.

[0] which provides, as the definition for the non-literal use: "(informal) Used for emphasis or to express strong feeling while not being literally true" and, says of that use in the usage note: "In recent years, an extended use of literally (and also literal) has become very common, where literally (or literal) is used deliberately in nonliteral contexts, for added effect: ‘they bought the car and literally ran it into the ground’."

On reflection, I agree!

Hyperbole, yes, but the word is often used in a sense that is semantically identical to "figuratively". For example, in my previous comment you could s/literally kills/figuratively kills/ without changing the sentence's meaning. (Although it would change the role of the modifier from emphasis to clarification.)

> Hyperbole, yes, but the word is often used in a sense that is semantically identical to "figuratively".

No, its used as an intensifier when the fact that the usage is figurative is implicit, it is not used in a manner semantically identical to figuratively. (When used in this way it is used figuratively -- to mean "almost as if literally" -- but it is not used to mean "figuratively". That is, without "literally" in the same context, the phrase would already be understood to be figurative, the word "literally" is not communicating the meaning "figuratively", it is communicating something about the already-figurative use of the word modified.)

"literally" is used as an intensifier, as a weaker form of its original meaning. It's not an antonym of itself.

"You know what happened last month without anybody noticing? This is for real. Webster’s dictionary expanded the definition of the word “literally” to include the way it’s commonly misused. So the thing is, we no longer have a word in the English language that means literally. It literally doesn’t have a synonym. So we’re going to have to find a Latin word for it and use it, but see, I don’t know any Latin. So when I say that I am literally going to set fire to this building with you in it before I hand over the keys to it, you don’t know if I’m speaking figuratively or literally.” -- The Newsroom

"Now" seems an odd word choice considering it's been an auto-antonym since at least the days of Mark Twain.

I should say "now officially", then :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com