Few phrases so rile language purists as the usage of the adverb “literally” in a figurative sense, as in, “That movie literally blew my mind.”
However as a linguist who research how English has modified over the centuries, I can promise that, whereas it’d really feel like nails screeching on a blackboard, the usage of nonliteral “literally” developed as an natural and dynamic outgrowth of the very human need to speak emotion and depth.
The literal previous
The phrase literal first appeared in English within the late 14th century, borrowed from French. In flip, French “literal” got here from Latin “littera,” with the unique that means of “pertaining to alphabetic letters.” It’s this similar root that delivered to English the phrases “literate” and “literature,” each paying homage to the thought of figuring out one’s “letters.”
In early English use, literal referred to the easy that means recoverable from studying a non secular textual content, as on this instance from the Wycliffe Bible relationship to 1383, “Holy scripture hath iiij vndirstondingis; literal, allegorik, moral, and anagogik.” The phrase literal as used right here contrasts a direct – literal – studying of scripture’s that means to different extra symbolic or metaphorical ones.
A web page from the 1383 Wycliffe Bible, a translation that used the phrase literal to explain ‘Holy scripture.’
Picture 12/Common Pictures Group through Getty Pictures
By the late sixteenth century, although, literal begins for use not simply in reference to a sort of studying but in addition as a approach to emphasize that one desires one’s phrases to be taken actually.
This improvement is already a semantic leap in that, when used this manner – as in, “John literally died of thirst” – the phrase offers no that means contribution aside from emphasizing to a listener {that a} speaker means it exactly as stated. In any case, assuming John did certainly die owing to an absence of hydration, what does a speaker actually achieve by saying “He literally died of thirst” versus merely “He died of thirst”?
The benefit is that utilizing “literally” indicators that what was stated was uncommon, unbelievable or outstanding not directly, steering a listener towards a literal reasonably than a maybe extra seemingly figurative interpretation.
In any case, dying of thirst just isn’t one thing you hear about day-after-day, although affected by thirst to the purpose the place one looks like dying is a extra common expertise. Such pragmatic enhancement of the phrase’s authentic that means hints at how its fashionable marking of sturdy emphasis got here into play.
Bleached past recognition
The second piece of the puzzle of how “literally” turned nonliteral requires a short foray into how phrase meanings organically evolve over time as they’re put to work by audio system.
A really germane instance comes from “very,” a phrase wherein its commonest that means – “extremely” – is however a shadow of its authentic sense.
In Center English, “very” carried the that means of “actual” or “true,” as in being “verray in worde and dede” – that’s, true in phrase and deed. But, when one thing is true, significantly when utilized in its “actual” sense, it means that it embodies the best diploma of no matter high quality is described as true.
So, as an illustration, if somebody is a “true fool,” they exhibit such a excessive diploma of foolishness they’re taken for an precise idiot. Used this manner, two distinct however associated meanings – “true” and “to an extreme degree” – come to coexist.
By the sixteenth century, depth reasonably than trueness had grow to be the phrase very’s major sense, by way of a course of that linguists check with as “semantic bleaching.” Apparently, phrases whose meanings contain reality, akin to very, actually and really, are significantly liable to semantic bleaching. And “truth,” as in “exactly as said or written,” takes us again to “literally.”
Rather less literal
Recall that “literally” as soon as pertained solely to contrasting a literal versus metaphorical studying.
However, as with “very,” by the sixteenth century, its that means shifts away from this purely referential that means to a extra rhetorical one: “Literally” had shifted to emphasizing a speaker’s literalness and flagging it as outstanding not directly.
At that time, offering expressivity reasonably than a real or literal studying had grow to be its major position. Simply take into account an argument between spouses, the place one says “I literally called you three times.” The aim of “literally” right here is basically solely considered one of underscoring the implication that calling 3 times was extreme and weird.
From there to hyperbolically saying “I was literally dying of thirst” is only one step additional down the street of semantic bleaching. The figurative studying turns into increasingly more potential, as audio system capitalize solely on the expressive pressure reasonably than the phrase’s former shell of literality.
That is actually no totally different than saying one thing like “I am truly dying over here” when one is annoyed, however is, in truth, not really dying. It’s depth conveyed, not imminent dying, as “truly” has moved from marking reality to marking emphasis.
Phrase meanings organically evolve over time as they’re put to work by audio system.
jaouad.Ok/iStock through Getty Pictures Plus
Signal of the occasions
However what of utilizing “literally” to imply one thing seemingly contradictory to its authentic that means?
On that entrance, it’s actually removed from the primary phrase in English to have shifted towards its reverse. For example, when in 1667’s “Paradise Lost” John Milton writes, “The Serpent … with brazen Eyes And hairie Main terrific,” the phrase “terrific” is totally supposed in its authentic sense of “terrifying”“ as opposed to our modern “fabulous” take.
Typically, conflicting senses even exist on the similar time. Consider how “clipping” could be about reducing one thing away or pulling one thing collectively. Likewise, take into account the customarily oppositionally employed verb “to cleave,” with which one both tears aside or sticks collectively. On this greater semantic image, utilizing “literally” nonfiguratively is basically nothing to get labored up over.
The gist is that language modifications due to the way it finds itself most gainfully employed by audio system because it winds its method by way of time.
Actually’s essential downside is that, in contrast to “terrific” or “very,” its semantic previous has not but pale from collective reminiscence. However for many who nonetheless cling to its literalness although Frances Brooke, Charles Dickens and Mark Twain all embraced its figurative glory, it could merely be time to actually let go.