you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 27 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I'm something of a grammar Nazi, but just like I support letting "whom" die, "less" and "fewer" might as well just be interchangeable. There's no loss of language utility in doing so, unlike "literally"'s tragic demise.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Literally has been used for emphasis, hyperbole, and metaphor since at least the late 18th century.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I'm aware, but it was done so sparingly, as opposed to being used to mean its opposite far more than its original meaning nowadays.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    That is how language works. It starts off small, then it catches on over time, and after a long time has passed, it either gets filtered out, or it becomes commonly used. The case for literally being used, for reasons other than its original one, started a couple hundred years ago. Today it is super commonly used that way, as it didn't get abandoned. You are mad at the nature of the beast.

  • source
  • parent