Much of Oliver's pedantry in his Pedant column at the Times I happily go along with, but some of it I don't. Today he's having a go at this sentence, ascribed to Lord Warner:
There's a big question mark as to whether there's even actually a Bill ready.
One of the things Oliver doesn't like about it is the 'actually', and it's true that the word is superfluous alongside 'even'. However, Oliver seems to have a more a general complaint against 'actually'. He writes:
[R]ead Warner's sentence again, but remove the word "actually". Do you notice a difference in meaning? You don't, because there isn't any. "Actually" is redundant. It falls into the category of what H.W. Fowler, the lexicographer, termed meaningless words.
This is, I protest, a pedantry too far. Whether or not it has a meaning, the word 'actually' can have a legitimate function - that function being to add emphasis. It's a bit like 'indeed'. I might say, for example, 'This is indeed a rum state of affairs'. By adding 'indeed' I don't say any more than that it's a rum state of affairs, but I do convey an intention of adding force to the assertion: maybe because you've already noted that it's a rum state of affairs and I wish to confirm my agreement with you, or maybe merely because I think it's very rum indeed (and note the 'very' there). The word 'actually', come to think of it, isn't all that different from 'really' - as in 'you really do get a sense of the remorseless banality of that evil', and 'It really did', and 'No, not really', and 'She is not really an admirer of murderous Communist tyranny'.