His distinction is unnecessarily confusing and does not take into account the fact that superlative adverbs never take "very". You can no more say "very always" than you can "very slowest".  It's a false problem. 
 
Phil Bralich


-----Original Message-----
From: Christine Gray <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sep 10, 2006 6:56 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Conjunctive Adverbs

Peter,

 

Thomas Klammer would disagree with you.  and after using his book for years, I now too disagree with you about these words as adverbs.

 

In his book Analyzing English Grammar, Klammer labels “always,” “sometimes,” “never,” etc. qualifiers, I think. 

 

I believe he points out that one of the tests of an adverb is whether “one” can put very or another intensifier in front of it.  He uses frame sentences as a way to identify a word as/check whether a word actually is a noun, verb, adjective, or adverb. 

 

I really really like his book.  Get a copy from your Longman rep.    

 

Christine  

 


From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Adams
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 7:25 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Conjunctive Adverbs

 


In a message dated 9/10/06 5:55:25 PM, [log in to unmask] writes:




Peter, I know what you mean about conjunctive adverbs.  They are “mobile,” as are adverbs.
 
However, conjunctive adverbs cannot be intensified, which is, I think, a property adverbs have: very suddenly, for example.  Nor are conjunctive adverbs able to modify verbs.



Good points, Christine, but consider the following.  Some adverbs also cannot be intensified:  always, sometimes, now, today, never.  I don't think anyone would argue these are not adverbs.

Also, take a look at these:

     Christine likes adverbs, but Herb, nevertheless, prefers conjunctions.
     Ed believes in innate knowledge, and Phil, therefore, agrees with him.

In these two, it seems clear that the so-called conjunctive adverb is not joining the two clauses; the coordinating conjunctions are serving that purpose.  So would we still call them conjunctions in sentences like these?

Or how about in a simple declarative sentence.

Roger Federer won the US Open, for example, in four sets.

Why would we want to consider for example to be a conjunction in a sentence like this.  Or would we?



Peter Adams

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/