@Fiat126@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone • 9 months agosocial media rulelemmy.blahaj.zoneimagemessage-square45arrow-up1730
arrow-up1730imagesocial media rulelemmy.blahaj.zone@Fiat126@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone • 9 months agomessage-square45
minus-squareOrbituarylinkfedilinkEnglish29•9 months agoLiterary or literally? (hint: neither are correct.)
minus-squareswitchboard_petelinkfedilink64•9 months agoliterally is objectively correct in this context
minus-square@syreus@lemmy.worldlinkfedilink1•9 months agoIn the secondary, new-age definition of “literally” yes that’s true. We lost the war for “literally”. It’s now just an emphasis word. The definition is mind bending: 1)in a literal manner or sense; exactly. 2)informal; used for emphasis or to express strong feeling while not being literally true. On the bright side less people use “absolutely” incorrectly than before.
minus-squaretrashcanlinkfedilink3•9 months agoSure, but where in the image do you see someone acknowledge the existence of Threads?
Literary or literally? (hint: neither are correct.)
literally is objectively correct in this context
Literaryly
The latter is correct, no?
In the secondary, new-age definition of “literally” yes that’s true.
We lost the war for “literally”. It’s now just an emphasis word. The definition is mind bending:
1)in a literal manner or sense; exactly.
2)informal; used for emphasis or to express strong feeling while not being literally true.
On the bright side less people use “absolutely” incorrectly than before.
Sure, but where in the image do you see someone acknowledge the existence of Threads?
deleted by creator
I’m reading it