TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Google's Definition of 'Literally'

8 pointsby alecbibatalmost 12 years ago

10 comments

D_Alexalmost 12 years ago
Eh.., I&#x27;ll put in the Urban Dictionary&#x27;s definition, for reference:<p>literally : used to describe something that actually happens or exists. A much misused adverb, often for emphasis. People often confuse this word with figuratively.<p>&quot;I literally died of embarrassment.&quot;<p>&quot;Really? How was reincarnation, you illiterate dipshit?&quot;
barnabaskalmost 12 years ago
When I literally want to use the word &quot;literally&quot; literally, I will now say &quot;non-figuratively&quot;, as in &quot;I non-figuratively cannot believe it&#x27;s come to this.&quot;
lutuspalmost 12 years ago
This is not at all surprising. Other online dictionaries list both definitions as well, on the ground that a dictionary&#x27;s purpose is to dispassionately report how people use words, not try to be consistent when people aren&#x27;t consistent.
评论 #6209512 未加载
pragmaralmost 12 years ago
The misuse of the term seems to date back three centuries, and has been abused for literary effect by many notable authors, including F. Scott Fitzgerald, Mark Twain, Jane Austin and Luisa May Alcott. So it seems perfectly acceptable to use the second definition with a wink, casually letting your audience know you know they know.<p><a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check-with-polly-curtis/2012/mar/12/reality-check-literally-wrong-use-word" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;politics&#x2F;reality-check-with-polly...</a>
shurcooLalmost 12 years ago
On my way home yesterday, I thought I&#x27;d invent a new natural language.<p>The definition of what is valid, legal would be simple: if 80% of English speaking population understands it, then it&#x27;s legal. So typos and stuff like this would not be considered a mistake. THere fore the FolloWing wouldz bee valid alsoo.<p>But then I&#x27;d have to define what it means to speak English, which would require a lot of complex rules, etc. Then I thought it would be pointless, as it wouldn&#x27;t matter if I wrote this down or not. People would still understand each other and go on about their lives.
评论 #6209726 未加载
a3voicesalmost 12 years ago
Languages change over time. &quot;Goodbye&quot; originated from &quot;God be with you&quot;, but I don&#x27;t see anyone complaining about it.
评论 #6209437 未加载
评论 #6209446 未加载
jasomillalmost 12 years ago
<a href="http://xkcd.com/1108/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;xkcd.com&#x2F;1108&#x2F;</a>
glomphalmost 12 years ago
This has been true of the word &#x27;literally&#x27; for hundreds of years. People seem to have coped. Pedants have just become more vocal since the internet.
iancarrollalmost 12 years ago
They should just remove the first definition.
评论 #6209422 未加载
评论 #6209481 未加载
thenewwayalmost 12 years ago
So if a tree falls in the forest <i>literally</i>, does it?
评论 #6209651 未加载