Cover not available

In:Processes of Change: Studies in Late Modern and Present-Day English
Edited by Sandra Jansen and Lucia Siebers
[Studies in Language Variation 21] 2019
► pp. 159–182

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Chapter 9
Attitudes to flat adverbs and English usage advice

Published online: 13 August 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.21.09luk
Widespread as they are in non-standard and informal varieties of English, flat or suffixless adverbs are subject to prescriptive criticism when appearing in standard English. In the present study we repeated the survey by Mittins et al. (1970) in Attitudes to English Usage to investigate whether the acceptability of flat adverbs has changed since the late 1960s. Our findings suggest that acceptability has grown over the past fifty years, with flat adverbs losing their status of a usage problem. The analysis of the Hyper Usage Guide of English database suggests the same. Interestingly, we identified a new usage problem related to the usage of adverbs, one primarily associated with American English, the dual-pair adverb, thus/thusly.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The survey
  • 3.Usage of slow/slowly and quicker/more quickly, and of thusly
    • 3.1Slow/slowly and quicker/more quickly
    • 3.2Thusly
  • 4.Survey results
    • 4.1The respondents
    • 4.2Acceptability ratings for quicker, go slow and thusly
    • 4.3Acceptability ranking for go slow, quicker and thusly across sociolinguistic groups
  • 5.Go slow/slowly, quicker/more quickly and thusly in the usage guides
  • 6.The usage guides and the informants
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgment
  • Notes
  • References
References (61)
References
Primary sources
The American heritage dictionary. 1996, ed. by William Morris. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
The American heritage guide to contemporary usage and style. 2005, ed. by Joseph P. Pickett, Steven Kleinedler & Susan Spitz. Boston, NY: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ayto, John. 2002. Good English! 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burchfield, Robert. 1996. Fowler’s Modern English usage. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Butterfield, Jeremy (ed.). 2007. Oxford A-Z of English usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carter, Bonnie & Craig Skates. 1990. The Rinehart guide to grammar and usage. 2nd edition. Fort Worth: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ebbitt, Wilma R. & David R. Ebbitt. 1978. Writer’s guide and index to English. 6th edition. Glenview, Cook County, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evans, Bergen & Cornelia Evans. 1957. A dictionary of contemporary American usage. New York: Random House.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fowler, H. W. 1926. A dictionary of Modern English usage. Oxford: University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garner, Bryan A. 1998. A dictionary of Modern American usage. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gowers, Sir Ernest. 1965. Fowler’s Modern English usage. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Greenbaum, Sidney & Janet Whitcut. 1988. The Longman guide to English usage. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krapp, George Philip. 1927. A comprehensive guide to good English. New York: Rand McNally.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Live and Learn: A guide for all, who wish to speak and write correctly (Anon., 1856?). New York: Dick & Fitzgerald, Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mager, N. H., & S. K. Mager. 1993. Prentice hall encyclopedic dictionary of English usage. 2nd edition revised by John Domini. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morris, William & Mary Morris. 1975. Harper dictionary of contemporary usage. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nicholson, Margaret. 1957. A dictionary of American-English usage: Based on Fowler's Modern English usage. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peters, Pam. 2004. The Cambridge guide to English usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pocket Fowler’s Modern English usage. 1999. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Randall, Bernice. 1988. Webster’s new world guide to current American usage. New York, NY: Prentice Hall, Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swan, Michael. 1980. Practical English usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taggart, Caroline. 2010. Her ladyship’s guide to the Queen’s English. London: National Trust.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Trask, R. L. 2001. Mind the gaffe. The Penguin guide to common errors in English. London/New York: Penguin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vallins, G. H. 1960. Better English. 2nd edition. London: André Deutsch.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Webster’s dictionary of English usage. 1989. Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster Inc., Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, Kenneth G. 1993. The Columbia guide to Standard American English. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wood, Frederick T. 1962. Current English usage. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
The Written Word 1977. ed. by Fernando de Mello Vianna, Anne D. Steinhardt & Carole La Mond. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Secondary sources
Beal, Joan. 2009. Three hundred years of prescriptivism (and counting). In Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade & W. Van der Wurff (eds.), Current issues in Late Modern English, 35–56. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Edward Finegan. 1989. Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text 9 (1). 93–124. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad & Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burridge, Kate. 2010. Linguistic cleanliness is next to godliness: Taboo and purism.” English Today 26 (2). 3–13. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burchfield, Robert. 1991. The Fowler brothers and the tradition of usage handbooks.” In Gerhard Leitner (ed.), English traditional grammars: An international perspective, 93–111. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crystal, David. 2006. Into the twenty-first century.” In Lynda Mugglestone (ed.), The Oxford history of English, 394–413. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Curzan, Anne. 2014. Fixing English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davies, Mark. 2008. The corpus of contemporary American English: 450 million words, 1990–present. [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Finegan, Edward. 1971. Linguistics, lexicography, and attitudes toward usage during the last decade. Pacific Coast Philology 6. 20–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hedges, Marilyn. 2011. Telling it like it is. An assessment of attitudes to language change based on the use of like. MA thesis: University of Leiden.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hughes, Arthur & Peter Trudgill. 1979. English accents and dialects. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lange, Cynthia. 2012. Thusly is not a word? Bridging the Unbridgeable (blog), 21 March 2012 ([URL]).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 2002. Recent grammatical change in English: Data, description, theory.” In Karin Aijmer & Bengt Altenberg (eds.), Language and computers, advances in corpus linguistics, 61–68. Amsterdam etc.: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lukač, Morana. 2015. Linguistic prescriptivism in letters to the editor. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 37 (3). 1–13.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. What is the difference between thus and thusly? e-Rea: Revue électronique d’études sur le monde anglophone . [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. Forthcoming. Grassroots Prescriptivism. English Today 34 (4).
Mair, Christian. 2006. Twentieth-century English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Milroy, James & Lesley Milroy. [1985] 2012. Authority in language. Investigating Standard English. 4th ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mittins, W. H., Mary Salu, Mary Edminson & Sheila Coyne. 1970. Attitudes to English usage [repr. 1975]. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Helena Raumolin-Brunberg. 2003. Historical Sociolinguistics. London etc.: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
ODNB: The Oxford dictionary of national biography, Online edition, [URL].
OED Online: The Oxford English dictionary, Online edition, [URL].
Opdahl, Lisa. 2000. LY or zero suffix? A study in variation of dual-form adverbs in present-day English. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peters, Pam. 2015. Dual adverbs in Australian English. In Peter Collins (ed.), Grammatical change in English worldwide, 179–204. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pullum, Geoffrey K. 2004. Ideology, power and linguistic theory. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the MLA in Philadelphia, PA. [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Straaijer, Robin. 2014. Hyper usage guide of English database. [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. The usage guide: Evolution of a genre. In Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (ed.), English usage guides: History, advice, attitudes, 11–29. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid. 2006. James Merrick (1720–1769): Poet, scholar, linguist. Historiographia Linguistica 38 (1/2). 39–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. Studying attitudes to English usage. English Today 29 (4). 3–12. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. Flat adverbs: Acceptable today? English Today 31 (3). 9−10. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid. In progress. Describing prescriptivism. Weiner, Edmund. 1988. On editing a usage guide. In E. G. Stanley & T. F. Hoad(eds.), Words. For Robert Burchfield’s sixty-fifth birthday, 171–183. Cambridge: D.S. Brewer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

COLLINS, PETER
2022. Hypercorrection in English: an intervarietal corpus-based study. English Language and Linguistics 26:2 ► pp. 279 ff. DOI logo
Yáñez-Bouza, Nuria
2022. Methodological approaches to the study of codification, prescription, and prescriptivism. Studia Neophilologica 94:3 ► pp. 334 ff. DOI logo
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid
2021. Of greengrocers, sports commentators, estate agents and television presenters: who’s in a usage guide and why. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 42:9 ► pp. 783 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue