Which, of course, reveals that the so-called Biblical literalists interpret the Bible idiosyncratically, not literally. Indeed, it is perfect nonsense to claim that there even is a literal interpretation of the Bible that can be uniformly discerned, much less claim that one adheres to such a chimera.
From what I have seen on these threads, the self-proclaimed Biblical literalists who argue an inherent incompatibility between Christianity and the theory of evolution are in fact arguing nothing less than an inherent incompatibility between Christianity and physical reality. They give every indication of being the most inept and disingenuous group of Bible readers extant today.
You wrote,
"it is perfect nonsense to claim that there even is a literal interpretation of the Bible that can be uniformly discerned"
What you neglect to realize, is that the Bible is composed of history, poetry, prophecy, and instructions for living.
Genesis is a history book. So taking it literally is no more nonsense than any other history book. The New Testament are also history books. However, within the teachings of Jesus are parabable, metaphor, analogy, and hyperbole. Also, we have false statements (made by the devil, for example) that are accurately recorded.
If one follows basic rules of interpretation (without a presupposition of anti-supernaturalsim) it is really not that difficult.
Now regarding the Hebrew word "day," it is used both ways in the Bible, so we must look to the context to determine the authors intent.
We do the same thing in English. When I say "It ran" did I mean a car, a dog, or my nose? The context would determine.
But to say that English is therefore unknowable would be self-refuting. The statement itself, "we can't take words literally" would cancel itself out.
Maybe it is those who take the Theory of Evolution literally who are the real ones to watch out for!