Selected Papers from the Fourteenth International ... - STIBA Malang

Adverb-marking in coordinate constructions 191
types of any kind. The rarity of occurrence of these minority types prevents any
clear picture of dynamic development being formed at this time. In the following
section, we will consider possible analyses of the alternative types, focusing on the
non-symmetric types, X and Y-ly and X-ly and Y.
4. Asymmetric coordination of derived adverbs in (Early)
Modern English
4.1 Status of asymmetric formation patterns in coordination
The occurrence of the two asymmetric patterns of formation type in adverbial
coordination being so rare across periods and text types, it is difficult indeed to
determine what their status might be, beyond, as stated, that these are definitely
minority types in the written mode at least. It is also not obvious what the chronological
path of development might be, as the types are found in (late) Middle
English and attested into the Early Modern period (and see below), without any
discernible trends at this point. It is worth remembering that adverbial coordination,
outside of legal texts and other formal genres, is itself rare, and (deadjectival)
adverbs are themselves quite rare; where space is at a premium, such as in private
correspondence and diaries, they may be lacking altogether. Based on the study
of a large number and broad range of texts, we can at least state some possible
hypotheses regarding the status of asymmetric adverbial coordination. Firstly, it is
possible that the minority patterns are so rare that they do not constitute part of
the norm for speakers/writers at any time; this would mean that each time that an
asymmetric structure is produced, it is the result of the spontaneous application
of a non-language-specific principle (see 4.2, 4.3). Secondly, it is possible that the
minority patterns constitute rare reflections of a pattern typical of the oral mode,
just as we presume that zero adverbs were much more common in speech than in
writing, based on current frequencies in each mode. As will be suggested below,
the motivations for the pattern would be the same as under the first hypothesis
in any case. However, unless an as yet undiscovered treasure-trove of attestations
awaits that would add substance to what has been established so far, there is nothing
concrete that would support one hypothesis over the other at this time.
It is perhaps instructive to consider, in support of the first hypothesis, the case
of Present-day English. It would be generally agreed that the normal pattern in
Present-day English for adverbial conjunction would be that resulting from the
lexical preference for each adverb in the conjunct in question, that is, that there
would be no expectation that adverbs in coordination would behave any differently
from their single habits. However, a brief Internet search brings up possibly
startling results: while, again, the majority pattern is clearly X-ly and Y-ly, the