word usage - Is it valid to use "literally" to mean "actually" when composing a hyperbole?



Whenever I see someone corrects another person on their use of "literally", it often seems to me like the corrector did not realize the sentence was supposed to be a hyperbole, and in fact depends on the correct usage of the word "literally" (to mean "actually") in order to be a hyperbole. For example:


"It is so amazing it will literally make your head explode".


Sure, nobody's head is going to "literally" explode from the sheer awesomeness of whatever "it" is, but isn't that exactly the point? If heads do not explode from something being awesome, then something would have to be extremely awesome in order to actually explode someone's head. This sentence basically says: "The intensity of how amazing this thing is is so great, that your head will actually explode from it."


This seems semantically correct to me, but people seem to criticize this use of "literally", as if it actually isn't semantically correct. Why is that?




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

verbs - "Baby is creeping" vs. "baby is crawling" in AmE

commas - Does this sentence have too many subjunctives?

grammatical number - Use of lone apostrophe for plural?

etymology - Where does the phrase "doctored" originate?

phrases - Somebody is gonna kiss the donkey

typography - When a dagger is used to indicate a note, must it come after an asterisk?

etymology - Origin of "s--t eating grin"