I am often very skeptical as to whether or not certain people know the meaning of the word “literally.” I mean, if I hear you say “Oh my gosh, this soft pretzel is so freaking hot. Man, it just burned my tongue off. Like literally, my tongue has third degree burns,” well, then, at least in my mind, when you stick out your tongue, it better look like it’s been through trench warfare. But way too often, people use the word “literally” to describe statements that are actually the exact opposite. For instance, a man telling a story today at church said, “Literally, you could have cut the tension in that room with a knife.” Really? With a knife? I ‘d like to see someone literally cut an abstract concept like tension with a knife. I’d bet any attempt at so doing would just look like a crazy man walking through an already tense room thrusting a knife with seemingly no direction.
If we think about it, the soft pretzel patron should have said something to the effect of, “Like figuratively, my tongue has third degree burns.” That kind of verbal specificity and precision fosters genuine and trustworthy communication. And integrity of communication is a thing that is really important to me. Because when someone tells me that they have third degree burns on their tongue, and they stick out a tongue that for the most part looks like any old boring tongue, I am always disappointed.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
The wise Marshall Hunt and I have, on occasion, discussed the misuse of this problematic word. The questions preposed: has years of misuse altered its meaning for the greater public? Is it slang? We have seen this with words like "random". Marshall noted that it is a peeve of his when people use "random" as a sort of catch-all adjective, describing any sort of unexpected circumstance. He claims that, while unexpectedness is a quality of a random event, not all unexpected things are truly random.
Popular misuse of "literally" has been similarly appropriated in American neo-descriptive language. However, where "random" succeeds in a slang context, "literally" fails. This is because, when misused, it is, by definition, used in the exact opposite, way. So why is it so frequently misused? Most people could probably tell you its true definition, yet that hasn't prevented this quirky phenomenon.
Perhaps it is because "literally" is now used to create emphasis on a predicate rather than clarify it. For example: "I was so hungry, I literally could have eaten a horse." Here, "literally" is meant to intensify the degree of hunger, as if the (ironically) figurative expression wasn't sufficient, rather than to mean with certainty that one could truly consume a horse in its entirety due to extreme hunger alone. Marshall and I have agreed that the word "literally" owns certain phonetic and linguistically prosodic properties that instigate this error.
1. It has four syllables with the stress occurring on the first syllable, similar to other emphatic words like "seriously" and "actually". Three syllable emphatic words like, "totally" and "honestly" also contribute.
2. It ends in "ly", giving it an adverbial quality. Adverbs are used to modify actions and, while not necessarily emphatic, may offer a sense of stress or urgency. "We ate quickly.", "She drove speedily about town."
Considering this, it is easier to see why "literally" is misused with such frequency. Still, I prefer its literal definition.
This post made my morning. I will be paying closer attention to my quite literal coworkers today.
sweet, I think I was literally the inspiration for this post.
Yipee, a new post. I am literally jumping out of my skin with excitement :) (I am sure you are going to get one of those from ever comment but not everyone will be clever enough to add a smilie also!)
My mum was describing the show The Amazing Race yesterday and noted that contestants often "literally throw people under the bus". I was, in fact, momentarily confused as to her meaning, which I think is a pretty good guide to whether a given usage is bad.
I loved your blog post. Literally. However, since I am a negligent blog reader, please create an awesome high tech way to alert me when you put up a new posting. Something that floats through cyberspace, a messenger owl, a cell phone telegram-- O wait, that might not work since I am equally negligent at carrying my cell phone or at least turning it on. Maybe after December when you have a bigger allotment for creative energies, I will have to be a daily peruser. I look forward to being highly entertained on a regular basis.
Amy, Google Reader is exactly what you're looking for.
dont ever come back to my house.
Post a Comment