Literally annoyed (OT)

[peregrine@xxxxxxxx]

I'm with Harry on this one, David, though I loved your example and your point about hyperbole.



It isn't that Pogue's usage wouldn't be understood in the vernacular, but in this case it's a word that carries no water and, worse yet, begs a question that may force the reader to stop and wonder "why literally, I wonder?" ... and that question is entirely beside the point Pogue is making. It's the journalist in me that says, "if a modifier doesn't add something significant, lose it." If it doesn't add something AND it impedes the flow of thought, shoot it twice.



But I must say, "literally driven up the walls" and "literally hit the ceiling" do appeal to the part of me that once enjoyed the Three Stooges. Nyuck nyuck.



Dos centavos mios,

Jeff



David Auerbach wrote:


Harry,
 I don't get it. The use of "literally" as an intensifier of a
metaphor I find very very annoying-- it makes me literally hit the
ceiling. But Pogue's usage? While not elegant writing, it seems OK
to me. He means there's no figure of speech here, he packed two
laptops (i.e., it isn't hyperbole, he doesn't mean two operating
systems, etc.).
 It's another kettle of fish entirely. No?

On Jun 7, at 8:24 PM, Harry Binswanger wrote:

> Are you literally driven up the walls, as I am, by the misuse of
> "literally" as in the start of this sentence? As a list-moderator,
> I see it almost daily. Sometimes its amusing, but mostly it's
> frustrating.
>
> It occurs, in a variant form, in David Pogue's column:
>
> "On trips, I literally used to pack two laptops."









AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000437.