“We’re watching a movie”
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (62)
sorted by:
The word is often used in a non-literal sense. For example this conversation is retarded. not in the literal sense, since the conversation doesn't have a mental delay, instead it's a useless argument on semantics. for that reason it is retarded. but not literally.
Since a conversation is incapable of being "retarded" you should probably simply use your other descriptors. Otherwise one runs the risk of being confused for being retarded, disabled or worse yet a confused leftist. Worse since a retarded or disabled person has a perfectly reasonable excuse for their condition but a leftist, for all intents and purpose, appear to be much more capable than those with a debilitating condition yet behave otherwise.
Try "this conversation is a useless argument on semantics."
Look, its not my fault our language has been butchered. The fact that the word is often incorrectly used in a non-literal way should not give the excuse for another to also use it incorrectly. How about just use the word correctly rather than playing into the madness.
Not sure why your even arguing this. If your bothered by someone calling you out and would rather continue to use those words in that way without being bothered, I don't know, send word to Webster or convince linguistic experts to change our language to your liking and have the rest of the masses use it in that way.
This is awful and laughable at the same time. You'll be fine without using "literally" I promise.
You act as though colloquial lenguage does not exist, or words, cannot have more than one use. The reason "literally" exists is because words can be used outside of their original meaning to mean something else.
No. 'Literally' does not exist for that reason.
'Literally' does nothing for a word or term said in context. If I say the term "that car is red" would it benefit that term to instead say "that car is literally red". No. Why? Because "red" means red and should not mean any other color when speaking English. Can someone interpret the word "red" to mean what the rest of us see as pink? Sure, but society doesnt adjust to the person in error by adding "literally" in front of "red" but instead we help correct the error.
Look, I'm a horrible speller and my grammar is below average. I welcome anyone that corrects me. While not the greatest writer and speaker I am big fan of those that use the spoken language with precision. When a speaker has a deep vocabulary, uses concise sentences and words well thought out before spoken, its a thing of beauty and something to behold. Why? Because it tugs at your attention, it zeros you in and inevitably pulls you in. Once a speaker is able to do that he/she can have great impact on the audience.
What happens after garnering his/her audience is what angels and devils are made from. History is littered with those examples.
Please, provide an example where the word is used correctly..