It is a bugbear for some, irregardless of when the first example was documented. Loose/lose has the potential to be such an annoyance. For some people.
The word “new” can carry a connotation of “recent” but it more literally implies “the latest version.” For all intensive purposes, I did not mean to imply the controversy about the metaphorical use of “literally” was a recent development.
Fair enough. My comment wasn’t aimed so much at you, I just like pointing out that the use of literally as an intensifier has a long and prestigious history.
Also, really sorry to do this to you, but it’s “all intents and purposes”, not “intensive purposes”.
It is a bugbear for some, irregardless of when the first example was documented. Loose/lose has the potential to be such an annoyance. For some people.
The word “new” can carry a connotation of “recent” but it more literally implies “the latest version.” For all intensive purposes, I did not mean to imply the controversy about the metaphorical use of “literally” was a recent development.
Fair enough. My comment wasn’t aimed so much at you, I just like pointing out that the use of literally as an intensifier has a long and prestigious history.
Also, really sorry to do this to you, but it’s “all intents and purposes”, not “intensive purposes”.
Also, irregardless isn’t a word if we’re being hardcore grammar Nazis here…