The following lines were added (+) and removed (-):
Literally: a crutch word.Literally: a contemporary crutch word of the late aughts of the century or perhaps more so the 2010s (twenty-tens). [[File:literally3.png]][[File:literallydefine.png]]Have we literally broken the English language? According to [https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/13/literally-broken-english-language-definition Martha Gill] we should avoid using the word for the moment. Her talking points include:#Mucking about with its meaning isn't clever or inventive any more#To use it is to teeter on the edge of a conversational wormhole #So there really is not much we can do with the word "literally", other than avoid it completely. At the moment it is irredeemable. It is a moot word.[[File:literally3.png]]"It should not be used as a synonym for actually or really," writes Paul Brians in "Common Errors in English Usage." He also states, "Don’t say of someone that he "literally blew up" unless he swallows a stick of dynamite.""My impression is that many people don't have any idea of what 'literally' means — or used to mean," Boston University psycholinguist Jean Berko Gleason told the Boston Globe. "So they say things like 'He was literally insane with jealousy.' If in response, you asked them if this person had been institutionalized, they'd look at you as if you were the crazy one."The fact that Charles Dickens used literally in a figurative sense ("'Lift him out,' said Squeers, after he had literally feasted his eyes, in silence, upon the culprit") doesn't justify altering the definition or contemporary overuse of the word. For example, you wouldn't find the word "literally" a dozen times on each page of his composition. Consider how often you hear the typical millennial use the word in ordinary conversation. <big>omg-like-literally</big> - express yourself with the poise, intelligence, and brevity of a typical millennial San Fernando Valley girl.The fact that Charles Dickens used literally in a figurative sense ("'Lift him out,' said Squeers, after he had literally feasted his eyes, in silence, upon the culprit") doesn't justify altering the definition or contemporary overuse of the word. The irritation is two part, 1) the word often use incorrectly, and 2) the word is used too often without regards to correctness. [[File:literallyexploded.png]] 🥰💕❤️🌸 #Day6GravityinDallas D-3@romo_valeria 17 May 15 It's true lol XD #literallyoverused pic.twitter.com/vEsQRwSCVl Josh@Dorkfi5h 4 Aug 14 Replying to @JohnnyFeisty @margitan @JohnnyFeisty @margitan I literally hate the new definition of literally. #literallyisliterallyHollywood and television producers attempt to influence culture and social interaction by the introduction of subtle or perhaps subliminal words and messages in media. Consider the television programs "Parks and Recreation" and "The Goldbergs" introducing with great force the indulgence of "literally" a number of times per episode, the common pop culture consumer can't help but to become brainwashed and parrot the popular patois.Merriam-Webster added a second usage of the word "literally" to mean "virtually," but added the disclaimer that "Since some people take sense 2 to be the opposite of sense 1, it has been frequently criticized as a misuse. Instead, the use is pure hyperbole intended to gain emphasis, but it often appears in contexts where no additional emphasis is necessary."In the next decade millennials and the following coming of age generation will likely misuse the word "hot" when describing something that is actually cold, such as ice. Following the most logical (to them) course of action diligent liberal compassionate and understanding authors and editors of Merriam-Webster will include the new opposite definition. Perhaps in a couple following decades all words will have blended with no clear and definite definition. In conversation no one will have any actual idea of the information attempting to be conveyed. Following that mankind will regress into a dialect of grunting and hooting completely doing away with all of the pesky words that make up language. Who needs the Wernicke's area of the brian? Why not let man de-evolve (devolution) back to Australopithecus and dispense with the use of language altogether?