• @samus12345@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    101 year ago

    It is hyperbole, but the problem is that it’s using a word that was supposed to specify that something was not hyperbole as hyperbole, rendering it useless.

    • the problem is that it’s using a word that was supposed to specify that something was not hyperbole as hyperbole, rendering it useless.

      … Or… Because it’s a word specifically meant to indicate it is not hyperbolic, using it in that way is literally the superlative hyperbole.

        • @Classy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          41 year ago

          Now you have to hit literally in the chest with an adrenaline shot to bring lividity into its decaying body.

          quite literally

          actually literally

          • @samus12345@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            A good point, I haven’t seen “quite literally” used to mean “figuratively.” Perhaps there’s some usefulness to be had yet.

    • JackbyDev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 year ago

      rendering it useless

      Another example of hyperbole.

    • @ricecake@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      Except some of the earliest uses of the word “literally” that didn’t pertain to letters and glyps we in the form of hyperbole.
      Literal as factual and literal as exaggeration both about the same age and precedent, and have been used long enough that it’s just part of the English language at this point.
      May as well complain about how “discreet” and “indiscreet” are opposites, but “flammable” and “inflammable” are the same.

      https://people.sc.fsu.edu/~jburkardt/fun/wordplay/autoanto.html

      English is a language of contradictions and massively confusing syntax. News at 11.