How does this construct affect the argument over the original or even the modern meaning of the word hell, in any language?

I’m not sure what you mean.

I caution both commentators that it is dangerous to make sweeping
statements about what most people mean when they use this or that word.
I think on any basis your own personal sample will be too small to make
such sweeping probability claims.

I agree.  I’m not trying to make sweeping claims about all times and all places.  I’m not trying to make a scientific claim based on large statistical samplings.  I took a commonplace understanding of "hell" and called it into question.   

What meaning "should" we assign to the word in light of a post-modern rejection of the supernatural?

I think "hell" can/should be seen not in metaphyical terms, but in concrete relational terms.  As Martin Buber might put it, "hell" is increasing distance between I and Thou, between You and Me, and between I and I.  Relational estrangement and disconnection is "hell."  And as Jesus indicated, it is a "whole body" experience, one that is most physical and destructive.