Skip to main content

Using short adjectives as adverbs, such as "easy" & "short"


I know that some adjectives (such as easy & short) can be used as adverbs in some situations, but when can this happen and what adjectives does this apply to?


This definitely works: "He stopped short" But does this?: "He fell pretty hard"



Answer



I don't think there's much more to it: some adjectives can simply be used as adverbs too. Some can only be so used in certain idiomatic expressions (your estimate fell short), others in a broader context (she drove by fast). There are also other adverbs that simply don't end in -ly, like soon and yonder.


The now productive suffix -ly for adverbs is relatively recent; Dutch and German don't have it—that is, the suffix exists, but it is used differently. In Proto-Germanic/Gothic, the suffix -lîko- could be used to form adjectives from nouns and other adjectives. (Cf. manly, soldierly, womanly, masterly.) The normal suffix for adverbs was -e in Old English, which still exists in German. When the -e ceased to be pronounced in English, at some point -ly became the normal adverbial suffix (it is supposed that there had been adverbs in -ly that had the suffix because they were based on earlier adjectives with -ly, Oxford English Dictionary on -ly_2). This history of the suffix is probably the reason why we still do not use it consistently today.


A small list of seemingly normal English adjectives that can also be adverbs, to which I invite anyone to add more examples:



  • Rest easy.

  • Work hard.

  • Sit still.

  • Fall short.


Edited: The question remains why these adverbs cannot be used before the finite verb:



They quickly followed her.


They soon found her.


*They fast drove to the palace.



I have a theory: because words like fast can be used as regular adjectives, and because many verbs can be used as nouns, it would be very confusing if we could say both *they hard work and their hard work. It could easily lead readers on a false scent, especially in more complex sentences. That could be a reason why we do not use these words in that particular position.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more