<i>Going</i> + COMP projects PP, not AdvP: a reply to Silvennoinen (2025)

Abstract Silvennoinen (2025) analyzes the stored sequence going forward as an adverb that inherits adverb-class morphosyntax. This reply challenges that categorization on empirical grounds. The construction fails the key distributional test for adverbs: it cannot occur in integrated-medial position between subject and verb (* We going forward will prioritize replication ), the diagnostic slot for core adverbs ( We certainly will prioritize replication ). Analysis of Silvennoinen’s corpus ( n = 1,517) confirms this restriction – apparent ‘medial’ tokens prove either to be NP-internal modifiers or parenthetical supplements, never integrated clausal constituents. Instead, going forward patterns with PP adjuncts, occurring clause-initially, clause-finally, or as supplements. Internally, deverbal going heads the construction and licenses a directional complement forward ( s ), parallel to established deverbal prepositions like according [ to …] and depending [ on …]. The construction thus projects PP, not AdvP, aligning with The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language ’s flexible-complement analysis of prepositions. This case demonstrates that storage and semantic specialization do not force categorical reanalysis.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
English Language and Linguistics
Published
2025-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s1360674325100543
Primary Topic
Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Going + COMP projects PP, not AdvP: a reply to Silvennoinen (2025)

Brett Reynolds
English Language and Linguistics
Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
article

Going + COMP projects PP, not AdvP: a reply to Silvennoinen (2025)

Brett Reynolds
article en

Abstract

Abstract Silvennoinen (2025) analyzes the stored sequence going forward as an adverb that inherits adverb-class morphosyntax. This reply challenges that categorization on empirical grounds. The construction fails the key distributional test for adverbs: it cannot occur in integrated-medial position between subject and verb (* We going forward will prioritize replication ), the diagnostic slot for core adverbs ( We certainly will prioritize replication ). Analysis of Silvennoinen’s corpus ( n = 1,517) confirms this restriction – apparent ‘medial’ tokens prove either to be NP-internal modifiers or parenthetical supplements, never integrated clausal constituents. Instead, going forward patterns with PP adjuncts, occurring clause-initially, clause-finally, or as supplements. Internally, deverbal going heads the construction and licenses a directional complement forward ( s ), parallel to established deverbal prepositions like according [ to …] and depending [ on …]. The construction thus projects PP, not AdvP, aligning with The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language ’s flexible-complement analysis of prepositions. This case demonstrates that storage and semantic specialization do not force categorical reanalysis.

English Language and LinguisticsVol. 29(4)
Humber Polytechnic (CA), University of Toronto (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 55%
Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.