86
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2026
86 points (97.8% liked)
Not The Onion
21032 readers
217 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
@scarabic Depends on the dictionary. Some are better than this.
Anyway, you don't have to accept what M-W says if you don't want to. No one owns or controls English.
Dictionaries have armies of people who decide these things, based chiefly on where they stand on the P-D spectrum. M-W is "strongly descriptive", meaning they cotton to popular misuse. And that's a view you can accept or not, as you please.
Some of the more 'popular' dictionaries do this to make more money over time.
Damn you, Big Dictionary!
Not all dictionaries, true. But enough of them have given in that appealing to dictionaries at all becomes a stalemate. Good luck debating the D-P spectrum with someone who can’t use “literally properly.
And no one owns English, true. That also means though that I’m in no position to complain about anyone’s usage of words. Eh. It’s just not a battle I pick anymore.
I’m not a hardcore prescriptivist - I just dislike changes that destroy useful nuances. And I think that’s a good, utilitarian standard we should be able to apply universally.
Like nowadays “decimate” just means the same thing as “devastate” or “destroy” and we no longer have a specific word for “reduce by one-tenth.” Sure, that word is only occasionally needed, but we didn’t need a third word for destroy/devastate at all. And I still wonder for half a second, when someone talks about an army being decimated, if they mean 1/10 or totally.
The dilution of “literally” is similar. It reduces our options for specificity and often leaves you confused about what someone is saying. That’s a bad change IMHO and dictionaries should resist it. The whole point of dictionaries was to retard the morphing of language. They’re a big reason that change has slowed down since the times of Chaucer. But they have abdicated this and become mere linguistic enthographers.