Re:The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’
by repsilat on Saturday March 16, 2019 @02:17PM
(#19409273)
> "literally", which has evolved so much that the dictionary has literally changed its definition to indicate that it could be used metaphorically
Just as surprising to me is people saying the word "silently" aloud. As though they don't know what it originally meant!
Re:The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’
by analogyexpert on Saturday March 16, 2019 @03:28PM
(#19409679)
I think it requires some mental gymnastics to say that you shouldn't be surprised that a term that etymologically means 'according to the direct and actual meaning of the words themselves' could be reappropriated to mean, in effect, the opposite - literally almost nothing, a blank hyperbole - taking more purpose in its effect on the rhythm of a sentence, than from any of its dictionary definitions.
Re:The difference between ‘broke’ and ‘poor’
by repsilat on Saturday March 16, 2019 @04:42PM
(#19410162)
In the circumstances when "literally" is used figuratively it is an intensifier. It is never used to mean "figuratively".
Compare "really" (which funnily enough etymologically points towards meaning "literally" or "truly" as well.)
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literally
Trying to police popular slang is a losing endeavor, and I don't think it accomplishes all that much. People already know that there's a difference between someone who's too poor to go clubbing, and someone who's too poor to buy food.
That said, I can empathize with the author's frustration, and I think it's sad that we don't hear such life stories more frequently. The stories we see on TV and hear in the media, are too often skewed in favor of those privileged enough to work in these industries, or to spend their time and money consuming them. That makes it all the easier to forget that people like the author even exist. Out of sight, out of mind.