Irregardless, if a word shifts spelling or meaning like this and is generally understood, even if initially by mistake, than it becomes becomes another correct meaning too. Like, literally.
Maybe it would help if you knew there were more? Or maybe that would make it feel worse, but there are more. It's a pretty common pattern in language for some reason, called "contronyms." So literally can mean actually or figuratively, but others include clip (cut off or attach), oversight (to overlook, or to scrutinize closely), sanction (approve something or penalize it), or even fast (moving quickly or still, as in held fast). Context is key, people will adapt as meanings are ever shifting.
In writing, yes. But when spoken the emphasis is different. If the "fahren" is stressed, then you are driving around something (umFAHren). If the "um" is stressed (UMfahren), then you are talking about property damage or murder.
The fact that most people understand people are being literally figurative is proof that the word is working linguistically. It’s easy to understand in context which use is being intended, and always has been. The fact that people are bothered by it is the new annoying phenomenon.
Pendants should read books, just once, or twice, at least.
That, and then you have my 6-year old who uses "literally" to emphasize his statements. It's pretty funny to listen for that word at my house. It becomes a game of
A piece of unverified or inaccurate information that is presented in the press as factual, often as part of a publicity effort, and that is then accepted as true because of frequent repetition.
After I heard even Sam Harris misuse this word I just accepted it is now a synonym for a fact despite that the original meaning is the exact opposite.
Some words are poorly designed and IMO that's one of them. Sure, you can just make up words and give them whatever meaning you want, but it won't work so well if the word itself causes a bias of assumption towards another meaning, especially if it's the opposite of what you want it to mean.
Just like inflammable. "In" used in that context usually means "not". Whoever decided that it should mean "very" in this one case was IMO a bigger idiot than anyone who assumed it's opposite meaning afterwards. Either that or an asshole if it was deliberate.