Here's a link to the difference between "tatsächlich" and "eigentlich" in case you're wondering: http://marathonsprachen.com/actually-there-is-a-difference-eigentlich-vs-tatsachlich/
The website is no longer available, but it is archived on the WayBack Machine: http://web.archive.org/web/20141230175527/http://marathonsprachen.com:80/actually-there-is-a-difference-eigentlich-vs-tatsachlich/
In fact, actually often means nothing, or very little, in English. It is often used to fill space while thinking and speaking.
I see a distinction between "actually" and "exactly." "Actually" refers to authenticity, whereas "exactly" refers to precision. Someone says, "I'm the boss." You reply "Who are you actually?" The answer might be, "Well, actually I'm the boss's assistant." However, if you had asked,"Who exactly are you?" The answer should be more like, "I'm the CEO (or the Chief of Marketing,etc.)."
Yeah... but take it as though you've been lied to, the other person has tricked you into thinking she/he is somebody that she/he is not. So you 'sort of' know her/him and then you just use informal 'du'
In spanish we call it tutear (the use of 'du') and you'd do so whenever you've spent a considerable time with someone or when it is about a pair.
In English, the translation "Who are you, anyway?" has a sound of some disdain: who are you to think you can give such a bold opinion? or some such. In Dutch, the sentence closely equivalent to this one, "Wie ben je (nou) eigenlijk?" has the same sort of feeling to it. Is this true for this German one, as well, or is it just a more neutral, honest request for information?
No, you can't.
Also, personal pronouns also generally come immediately after the verb, and even more immediately than an adverb.
For example: Ich habe gestern deinen Vater gesehen. versus Ich habe ihn gestern gesehen. -- the first sentence has the adverb gestern immediately after habe, and the second sentence has gestern immediately after habe but the personal pronoun ihn even more immediately after it.
Where on Earth are you getting these rules from? Just kidding.
In general, I completely agree. But the fact that you allow for an interrogative noun phrase (however long) makes this rule so malleable that it becomes half-useless.
P.S. Even then I can think of exceptions: "What really happened here?" is a different question from "What happened here, really?"
No harm would be done from them not realising that an adverb in second position is permitted when the interrogative is the subject of the sentence. By contrast, gibberish is created by routinely putting things other than verbs in second position:
- "What you wanted?"
- "What this question does it means?"
- "How you are called?"
- "Where today are you going?"
Note what a rule of thumb means.
Without interpunction the sentence is not grammaticaly correct. A subject and verb may be separated by an accompanying phrase (or word) without changing the agreement. The correct sentence would be "Who, really, are you?" It sounds like silly nitpicking but without those tiny commas the sentence is not in correct order.