About a Word: Literally

By Justin Bai

A common pet peeve when it comes to language is the use of the word “literally” when referring to something in a non-literal way. People have claimed that the word “literally” is losing its meaning as it has now come to mean “figuratively.” So nowadays, people can literally die of a broken heart and literally die of laughter yet still be very much alive. Is this new meaning of “literally” a sign that the English language is being destroyed? Well, no.First of all, it is not entirely accurate to say that “literally” has become synonymous with “figuratively.” Rather, “literally” has now been used sort of like an intensifier. (Intensifiers are adverbs like “very,” “really,” and “extremely” that adds intensity of emphasis.) So if someone literally exploded with rage, that person is extremely angry.One of the reasons that the non-literal sense of the word “literally” gets opposition is because the non-literal sense is like the opposite of the original, literal sense of the word. This would seem to lead us to the conclusion that the word “literally” is losing its meaning. How are we supposed to know what “literally” means if it can signify two opposing things? The answer is context. If someone said they are literally dying of boredom, there isn’t much confusion as to whether the person is just really, really bored or if the person is actually coming to the end of their life due to boredom. Furthermore, the argument that a word cannot have two different meanings does not hold water. There are many words that have several definitions and a handful of words that are their own opposites. For example, the word “depthless” can mean immeasurably deep, but it can also mean not deep, shallow. Thus, the word “literally” can just as well have two meanings that seem to be opposites.Another reason that the word’s newer meaning gets a bad reputation is because people claim that the original meaning of literally means “in a literal manner,” so somehow the newer definition is less legitimate. This argument also does not hold water because language is always changing. The meanings of words are not set in stone but rather are constantly being revised as the speakers of the language use the words in different ways. For example, the word “awful” originally meant “full of awe,” but now the word means “bad, terrible.” Another example of shifts in meanings of words is the meaning of the word “egregious.” Originally meaning “remarkably good,” this word nowadays is used to mean “remarkably bad.” With other words that have changed meaning and have gone unquestioned, it is unreasonable to say that “literally” must be used only in its original sense. So can you literally be burning with love for the non-literal sense of “literally” without actually being on fire? Yes.