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

194 Amanda Pounder
adjective in the first conjunct is monosyllabic and the adverb in the second conjunct
has initial stress, while in the second case, the base adjective has more than
one syllable and/or the adverb in the second conjunct has stress on some other syllable
than the first: this is a situation that will be very frequently encountered. Just
as there are many examples running counter to the tendency Schlüter observes
(e.g., (6a) extream careful), there are examples in which the choice of a zero adverb
in the first conjunct does not affect rhythm, that is, the rhythmic pattern is the
same as in the majority structure (e.g., (14a) seasonable and discreetly). Rhythmic
considerations do not appear to discourage the choice of the majority pattern
(e.g., (17g) slightly and deceitfully, (10b) diligently and discreetly), and in the case
of the zero adverb in the second conjunct, as illustrated in Section 3.3., they do not
seem to be applicable. While rhythmic considerations may favour the minority
pattern X and Y-ly, they cannot constitute the only motivation, therefore. One
would expect rhythm to be a greater concern in the oral mode, although there is
of course less time for evaluation and revision there. Although we have no direct
evidence of this, it is possible that the desire for pleasing rhythmic patterns encourages
the use of the pattern X and Y-ly in speech.
While we can concede that the selection of the minority pattern X and Y-ly
may be partially motivated by a preference for rhythmic alternation, it is necessary
to look for other factors that are likely to play a role. Relatively high lexical
frequency of the zero adverb can predispose it to appearing in coordination as well
(e.g., quick, plain, as in (19e) and (17d), (18) respectively). It may also be that the
aesthetic value of rhythmic symmetry, where both adverbs have the same number
of syllables and the same stress pattern, and/or of structural symmetry, where both
adverbs are of the same morphological structure, is at least as high as that placed
on rhythmic alternation.
4. Choice of formation type in adverbial coordination:
Morphological brachylogy/ellipsis
Another theoretical approach to form types in adverbial coordination structures
involves the concept of morphological ellipsis or “brachylogy”. The latter term
refers generally to economy through omission under identity or, more specifically,
the non-realization of morphological material where it can be recuperated
through the syntactic context. Regarding the two asymmetric adverbial coordination
structures, we would consider that the adverb marking by means of the
-ly suffix in the left or right conjunct “has scope over” the coordinate structure;
by some structure-sharing mechanism, the suffix is shared by both conjuncts. In
other words, the zero adverb is only apparently a conversion; rather, it is in fact
a morphologically incomplete form, namely a stem with a “gapped” suffix. (An
alternative understanding of the non-realization of a ly-suffix is that of deletion of