|Image from Wikipedia|
I know it's the OED's responsibility to keep a record of the English language as it evolves, so this was probably the right thing to do. I still don't like it though. It's so difficult to get the balance right between letting a language evolve (after all we don't speak in the same way people did 1000, 500 or even 100 years ago) and not caring about how a language is used, isn't it? One of the most commented-on posts on this blog was about grammar peeves - it's something people feel strongly about.
I know I have lost the battle to persuade people NOT to use 'invite' as noun ("I'll pop the invite in the post"). I even accept that I am a total hypocrite for steadfastly sticking to 'invitation' in this case, but often using 'quote' when I should really say 'quotation' ("I read a really great quote the other day") - which is exactly the same error. I do try to use 'quotation' but 'quote' often slips out when I'm not looking.
So what do you think? Are the OED right to upgrade 'literally', or should they be encouraging us to stamp out such sloppy use of language? I think maybe I'm with the presenter/journalist James Naughtie who, after hearing the news on the Today Programme (one of the UK's top current affairs programmes in the mornings) said something along the lines of, "It may be acceptable, but it still sounds stupid."