# Cowardly >> Archaism?



## lineaadicional

In a thread a member said that the word COWARDLY as an adverb was an archaism, and my dictionary DOES not say that. I just wanna  want to make sure my self since I use it as an adverb (according to me) and very often...

_*Acting cowardly is not a men's issue*_
_*Stop acting cowardly!*_

Are both correct? Is the adverb cowardly used incorrectly? If I keep using it, is gonna people say that I am an old-fashioned guy?  

Thank you all!


----------



## sdgraham

First of all, I suggest you drop the use of the word "wanna." It marks you in an uncomplimentary manner and indicates your lack of educated English.

No, "cowardly" is not archaic.


----------



## lineaadicional

sdgraham said:


> First of all, I suggest you drop the use of the word "wanna." It marks you in an uncomplimentary manner and indicates your lack of educated English.


 
Ooops! It seems like you were angry when you answered my post. Sorry for the "wanna" thing...

Linea


----------



## Packard

On the other hand, "dastardly" is used so infrequently that it is almost an anachronistic word.

And when it is used, it is rarely done so with a straight face.

"Cowardly" is simple, straight-shootin' English.  Use it with impunity.


----------



## Loob

Interesting! The OED allows "cowardly" as an adverb, without qualification.

But - while I'd happily use it as adjective - I don't think I've ever heard it used adverbially.

The WR dictionary has it as an adjective only.

I don't see lineaadicional's examples as problematical, because in both of them I'd have read "cowardly" as an adjective (cf "don't act stupid"). But if someone said "He came into the room cowardly", I'd definitely regard this as odd


----------



## anothersmith

That's interesting, Loob.  I've never heard or see it used as an adverb, either.  I wonder what the adverbial form would be . . . cowardlyly?  

Lineaadicional - this is an adjective that's still used today.  I'm very surprised that someone identified it as archaic.


----------



## Packard

Let's see:

He was a cowardly bastard.  (adjective)

He was behaving cowardly.  (adverb)


----------



## Loob

I'm not sure what you're saying, Packard.

Are you saying that "he was behaving cowardly" {cowardly = adverb} is fine for you?

(It sounds strange to me...)


----------



## Packard

Loob said:


> I'm not sure what you're saying, Packard.
> 
> Are you saying that "he was behaving cowardly" {cowardly = adverb} is fine for you?
> 
> (It sounds strange to me...)


 
He was behaving as a coward, i.e., "cowardly".


I don't recall ever using that phrase; I would not flag it if I saw it written.


----------



## cuchuflete

Loob said:


> Are you saying that "he was behaving cowardly" {cowardly = adverb} is fine for you?
> 
> (It sounds strange to me...)



It sounds strange to me too.  I find no grammatical fault with the sentence, but I
wouldn't use it, and it would catch my attention if I were to hear someone say it.
It's not wrong, but it's not the way people usually express the idea.


----------



## anothersmith

I would say "in a cowardly manner/way."


----------



## Loob

Lineaadicional, I think you have your answer.

Adverbial "cowardly" sounds strange to many people (including me).

Adjectival "cowardly" is unexceptional, and not at all archaic.


----------



## timpeac

I'm with Loob on this one - before reading this thread it wouldn't have occurred to me that "cowardly" could be an adverb (despite the way it's written). "He was behaving cowardly" sounds very odd to me - mind you "cowardlily" would sound worse... This reminds me of "timely" - a word I would only ever consider an adjective that I sometimes see written as an adverb "it should be done timely" where I would write "in a timely manner" - could this be a similar phenomenon?

Edit - and so in this I see I agree with anothersmith.


----------



## lineaadicional

Everything is almost clear (hehe) but I still having a big question mark over my head ... in this phrase:

Stop acting cowardly

the cowardly word is playing the roll of an adverb
YES or NOT?

Linea


----------



## Forero

"Acting cowardly" is like "acting stupid".  There's no adverb there.


----------



## Cagey

I would be more likely to say "Stop acting like a coward" or, "Stop being a coward".  That is, like the posters above, I would find the use of _cowardly_ as an adverb strange.  

I would use _cowardly_ only where it is clearly an adjective; a cowardly act; the cowardly lion, etc.


----------



## lineaadicional

So, what I understood after all is that COWARDLY as an adverb is not just uncommon but unsayable. I wanted to find an expression in English where it is used as an adverb but I guess that's to hidden and out of reach 

Linea


----------



## ewie

I'm afraid to say I quite like _cowardlily: _I like the way it combines _cowardly_ and _lily-livered_.  I'd only use it for comic effect, though.  Otherwise _like a coward._


----------



## IbnLD

Forero said:


> "Acting cowardly" is like "acting stupid".  There's no adverb there.


I think that it does play the rol of an adverb, it refers to the verb, not to a noun, so it's an adverb.


----------



## Packard

IbnLD said:


> I think that it does play the rol of an adverb, it refers to the verb, not to a noun, so it's an adverb.


 

If you are comfortable with the adverb "bravely" then there is no reason not to be comfortable with the adverb "cowardly".

*He fought bravely against a superior opponent.*

*He fought cowardly against an inferior opponent.*


----------



## Arrius

The unfounded  suspicion that _cowardly _was archaic may be be due to the frequency (especially in the dialogue of films) of  synonyms such as yellow, yellow-bellied, chicken, chicken-livered, etc. being used instead.


----------



## emma42

Well, there it is in my Chambers dictionary, listed as an adverb.

I have to say, though, that I have never seen it used as an adverb before reading this thread, and it sounds strange to me.  In fact, it _sounds i_ncorrect, even though it isn't.

Edit:  my post crossed with Lexiphile's.


----------



## Packard

Lexiphile said:


> I don't understand your logic there, Packard.
> 
> Brave is an adjective -- hence bravely is an adverb.
> Coward is a noun, so the *ly* on the end doesn't make it an adverb. It makes it into an adjective.
> 
> To me, your sentence with *cowardly* sounds strange enough to be considered wrong.


 

"Cowardly" modifies "fought", a verb. It is an adverb.


----------



## Lexiphile

Packard said:


> *He fought bravely against a superior opponent.*
> 
> *He fought cowardly against an inferior opponent.*


 
I don't understand you logic there Packard.
Brave is an adjective, so the *ly* on the end makes it into an adverb.
Coward is a noun, so the adjective-to-adverb rule doesn't apply.  Cowardly in an adjective.

Your sentence with cowardly sound so odd to me that I would consider it wrong.  I would never say such a thing.


----------



## emma42

Nevertheless, the dictionary has it as adj and adv.  It still sounds wrong, though!


----------



## Packard

Lexiphile said:


> I don't understand you logic there Packard.
> Brave is an adjective, so the *ly* on the end makes it into an adverb.
> Coward is a noun, so the adjective-to-adverb rule doesn't apply. Cowardly in an adjective.
> 
> Your sentence with cowardly sound so odd to me that I would consider it wrong. I would never say such a thing.


 
I was not doting on how the word was formed; I was only paying attention to its function.  It is modifying a verb; it is an adverb.


----------



## Lexiphile

Packard said:


> I was not doting on how the word was formed; I was only paying attention to its function. It is modifying a verb; it is an adverb.


 Quite so.  But the question remains, is this a valid sentence at all?  Several of us have said it sounds "odd."  And it sound odd precisely because, since we don't recognise the word "cowardly" as an adverb, it seems misused in the sentence. 
Is this a normal use of "cowardly" fo you?  Do we perhaps have a regional difference here?


----------



## Packard

I understand your point.

In the examples:

He was intelligent.

He acted intelligently.  (Sounds OK to me.)



He was smart.

He acted smartly.    (Sounds off to me.)

He tacked the boat smartly to the leeward.  (Sounds OK to me).



But for me, "bravely" and "cowardly" are exact opposites, and if I can use "bravely" then certainly I can use "cowardly".

He fought bravely.  (Sounds fine.)

He fought cowardly.  (Sounds awful; but intellectually it seems fine.)


----------



## María Madrid

I know pop/rock songs are not exactly the best language reference but here it goes...

_Burning my bridges and smashing my mirrors_
_Turning to see if you're *cowardly*_
_Burning the witches with mother religious_
_You'll strike the matches and shower me _
_In water games_

(Seven Seas - Echo and The Bunnymen)

Now I wonder about religious... I thought it was an adjective. Maybe worth a new thread?


----------



## Lexiphile

I Don't think so, María.
*Religious* is an adjective and is used as such here.  So, by the way, is *cowardly*.


----------



## María Madrid

Thanks for your reply. I'm still a bit confused. I thought the sentence meant "you're burning the witches cowardly" so I assumed it was an adverb, describing how that person is burning the witches...


----------



## cuchuflete

María Madrid said:


> I know pop/rock songs are not exactly the best language reference but here it goes...
> 
> _Burning my bridges and smashing my mirrors_
> _Turning to see if you're *cowardly*_
> _Burning the witches with mother religious_
> _You'll strike the matches and shower me _
> _In water games_
> 
> (Seven Seas - Echo and The Bunnymen)
> 
> Now I wonder about religious... I thought it was an adjective. Maybe worth a new thread?



Pop songs are often less than useless as language references.  This one is more literate
than most.  The usage of cowardly here is adjectival.


----------



## timpeac

Packard - I find your stance in this strange extremely odd - why such a passive adherence to supposed grammatical logic over what your own ears tell you? Every native speaker you included in this thread has said that "cowardly" used as an adverb sounds at least "bad" to them and many have said that they would have thought it were wrong and are surprised that a dictionary might list it as an adverb.

Personally I like to trust my own experience more and I can certainly say its use as an adverb sounds wrong to me - and I would suggest that a foreign speaker doesn't use it.

By the way the argument "in the phrase "he fought cowardly" the word cowardly is modifying fought and therefore it is an adverb" is specious I'm afraid since it can only prove true if it already is true - in other words to accept that argument you have to tacitly agree that "he fought cowardly" is an acceptable phrase. As I think someone pointed out adjectives can have the force of adverbs in familiar usage - "he fought stupid" is as acceptable or unacceptable for me as "he fought cowardly".

Finally, I don't know why we should assume that just because it ends "ly" it is an adverb. Are "dastardly" "timely" "homely" therefore adverbs too?


----------



## LV4-26

My Concise Oxford agrees with Emma's Chambers.



> *cowardly* _adj. & adv_.
> --_adj._ *1.* [....]*2. *[...]
> --_adv._ _archaic_ like a coward; with cowardice.



Only the adverb is mentionned as "archaic"...which is precisely what lineaaddicional reported in the first place.

Still, the adverb version being strictly homonymous to the adjective, I'm not surprised it should be disappearing.


----------



## Loob

Arrius said:


> The unfounded suspicion that _cowardly _was archaic may be be due to the frequency (especially in the dialogue of films) of synonyms such as yellow, yellow-bellied, chicken, chicken-livered, etc. being used instead.


Actually, it seems the idea that _cowardly _as an adverb is archaic came from the Concise Oxford Dictionary... Here is the _Vocabulario General_ post which led to the present thread 

EDIT: Sorry, J-M, I hadn't seen your post when I was writing this!


----------



## ewie

Yep, it's there allright ~ though in my edition (1984) it's not flagged as 'archaic'.
The same source also gives the adjective form _cowardy_ ['colloq'] ~ which would presumably give the adverb _cowardily_.


----------



## anothersmith

Packard said:


> If you are comfortable with the adverb "bravely" then there is no reason not to be comfortable with the adverb "cowardly".
> 
> *He fought bravely against a superior opponent.*
> 
> *He fought cowardly against an inferior opponent.*



I disagree.   Just because it looks like an adverb doesn't mean it _is_ an adverb.  Consider the adjective "portly."


----------



## lineaadicional

Fine...
I just got all confused!! And I don't remember who advise that but I guess it will be better if I stop using it as an adverb... however, the times I used it as an adverb, according to me, was an adjetive if I understood well.

Thanks to everybody!


----------



## emma42

Yes, lineaadicional, just use it as an adjective, and no one will think you are old-fashioned (heaven forbid!).


----------



## Packard

timpeac said:


> Packard - I find your stance in this strange extremely odd - why such a passive adherence to supposed grammatical logic over what your own ears tell you? *Every native speaker* you included in this thread has said that "cowardly" used as an adverb sounds at least "bad" to them and many have said that they would have thought it were wrong and are surprised that a dictionary might list it as an adverb...


 
In the interest of specificity I would point out that the preponderance of native speakers in this thread are Englishmen, and a different cross section of nationalities might yield a different conclusion.

The original post asked if it were incorrect to use cowardly as an adverb. I don't think it is incorrect. I did point out that I would not ordinarily use the word that way.

The consensus amongst Englishmen is that this sounds so strange as to be incorrect. I find that to be an unacceptable criteria. If every time something sounds strange it gets labeled as incorrect we would be wrong a whole lot of times.

Strange is strange; strange is not necessarily wrong.


----------



## Loob

Packard, mon cher

The issue here - as so often in these forums - is "do we anglophones recommend the use of X to second-language learners of English?"

If something sounds strange to us, then surely we recommend against it?


----------



## Packard

Loob said:


> Packard, mon cher
> 
> The issue here - as so often in these forums - is "do we anglophones recommend the use of X to second-language learners of English?"
> 
> If something sounds strange to us, then surely we recommend against it?


 
Absolutely.  But Timepeac was finding my position on this matter perplexing, and I am pointing out that there might be a difference in position on this point along with the difference in longitude.

But sounding strange is not a valid criteria for saying that something is incorrect.  It is a valid criteria for recommending against using the construction though.  I think a recommendation against using cowardly as an adverb is valid.  I don't think calling it incorrect based on sounding strange is a valid point.


----------



## ewie

Packard said:


> He fought bravely. (Sounds fine.)
> 
> He fought cowardly. (Sounds awful; but intellectually it seems fine.)


 
It does seem an _unusual_ approach, though, Pack.

_He divides his day into two halves. _(Sounds okay)
_He divided his day into two halves. _(Sounds okay)
_He goes to Paris. _(Sounds okay)
_He goed to Paris. _(Sounds okay; and intellectually fine)
_He went to Paris._ (Sounds weird ~ what could _that_ mean?)

[Bit of an extreme example ~ it was the first thing that came into my head]


----------



## panjandrum

Loob said:


> Packard, mon cher
> 
> The issue here - as so often in these forums - is "do we anglophones recommend the use of X to second-language learners of English?"
> 
> If something sounds strange to us, then surely we recommend against it?


The length of the thread so far suggests strongly that using cowardly (adverb) is going to cause an adverse reaction.
There are a few examples in the British National Corpus - very few - and one of them has an attached (?) suggesting surprise.


----------



## cuchuflete

Packard said:


> I think a recommendation against using cowardly as an adverb is valid.  I don't think calling it incorrect based on sounding strange is a valid point.



Why give this more energy than it's worth?  Why not say simply that the grammar is ok, but it is not idiomatic, it sounds very strange, and should be avoided?

"Incorrect" may, in fact, be a proper label if the thread starter is looking for idiomatic usage.  By that standard, something that natives avoid and find weird is not correct as idiomatic speech.  Something may be able to pass through the filter of violating no rules of grammar, and still be so dissonant to the native ear that it's splitting hairs to
argue whether it is "incorrect", "wrong" or "extremely awkward usage".  

We could compromise, and call it permissible but highly unsatisfactory.


----------



## Packard

ewie said:


> It does seem an _unusual_ approach, though, Pack.
> 
> _He divides his day into two halves. _(Sounds okay)
> _He divided his day into two halves. _(Sounds okay)
> _He goes to Paris. _(Sounds okay)
> _He went to Paris._ (Sounds weird ~ what could _that_ mean?)
> _He goed to Paris. _(Sounds okay; and intellectually fine)
> 
> [Bit of an extreme example ~ it was the first thing that came into my head]


 
Your example is not getting through to me. 

_"He went to Paris."_ Does not sound weird to me.

_"He went to Paris, then Milan, London and back home to good old New York."_

_He goed to Paris._ I can't imagine anyone thinking this does not sound OK and is not intellectually fine. It is quite elegant in fact.


----------



## timpeac

Packard said:


> Absolutely. But Timepeac was finding my position on this matter perplexing, and I am pointing out that there might be a difference in position on this point along with the difference in longitude.


I did look through the whole post again and I'm not in a mind to do it again now but as far as I remember there were representatives on both sides of the pond and all of them found this construction weird. Why on earth are you so determined to view a construction that sounds strange to your ear and to those of every other native speaker who has participated in this thread as acceptable? Even dictionaries say that its use as an adverb is archaic which amounts, in today's usage, as wrong. Ok - if you want to also add "est" on the end of your present tense verb forms then I agree that using "cowardly" as an adverb isn't "wrong". I'm fairly sure that I've never said anything different by the way than it sounds wrong _to me_. I am happy to see the evidence that it sounds wrong/odd to every other native speaker as well and that dictionaries that specify say it is "archaic" to go on recommending that foreign speakers do not use it as such which is all the thread was about.





Packard said:


> But sounding strange is not a valid criteria for saying that something is incorrect. It is a valid criteria for recommending against using the construction though. I think a recommendation against using cowardly as an adverb is valid. I don't think calling it incorrect based on sounding strange is a valid point.


Then this is not what you were saying to start with. You have been from start to finish categorical that this is an adverb



> Let's see:
> 
> He was a cowardly bastard. (adjective)
> 
> He was behaving cowardly. (adverb)


 


> If you are comfortable with the adverb "bravely" then there is no reason not to be comfortable with the adverb "cowardly".


 


> "Cowardly" modifies "fought", a verb. It is an adverb.


 


> I was not doting on how the word was formed; I was only paying attention to its function. It is modifying a verb; it is an adverb.


 
I've got bored at this point of copying your various categorical posts. I think that a fair summary of this thread is that no native speaker, including you, has found its use as an adverb as natural sounding. Therefore the message to non-native speakers should be not to use it as such. You are being irresponsible to the non-native speakers by claiming otherwise in my opinion.


----------



## timpeac

cuchuflete said:


> Why give this more energy than it's worth? Why not say simply that the grammar is ok, but it is not idiomatic, it sounds very strange, and should be avoided?


Because saying "the grammar is ok" is not correct. No native speaker has found the use acceptable. Dictionaries say that such a usage is archaic. It is therefore not correct. It is equally incorrect to say "thou hast" in modern day English.


----------



## Packard

timpeac said:


> Because saying "the grammar is ok" is not correct. No native speaker has found the use acceptable. Dictionaries say that such a usage is archaic. It is therefore not correct. It is equally incorrect to say "thou hast" in modern day English.


 
It is incorrect? 

You have shown that a preponderance of Englishmen find that is sounds that way.

But you have not demonstrated that it is incorrect.

My Webster's 3rd International Dictionary (a fairly modern dictionary) has a separate entry for "cowardly" as an adverb. No caveats attached. No "archaic" denotation.

I think that Chuchuflete fairly summed up my position. I have said that I would not use it as an adverb. It is correct as witnessed from entries in some fairly well regarded dictionaries.

Sounding strange is still not an acceptable way to declare something incorrect.

If something sounds strange, absent of any proof that it is incorrect, then all it is is a strange sounding construction. That is all it is.


----------



## timpeac

Packard said:


> It is incorrect?
> 
> You have shown that a preponderance of Englishmen find that is sounds that way.
> 
> But you have not demonstrated that it is incorrect.
> 
> My Webster's 3rd International Dictionary (a fairly modern dictionary) has a separate entry for "cowardly" as an adverb. No caveats attached. No "archaic" denotation.
> 
> I think that Chuchuflete fairly summed up my position. I have said that I would not use it as an adverb. It is correct as witnessed from entries in some fairly well regarded dictionaries.
> 
> Sounding strange is still not an acceptable way to declare something incorrect.
> 
> If something sounds strange, absent of any proof that it is incorrect, then all it is is a strange sounding construction. That is all it is.


How can you prove a usage is incorrect? Are you expecting some book to list every incorrect usage? I have not shown that a preponderance of Englishmen find that is sounds that way. This thread, open to all and now open across all time zones has resulted in a discussion where every participant, including Brits and Yanks and including you and me have all found the use odd. Some dictionaries go so far as to state it is archaic. All this is enough for me happily to say the usage as an adverb is incorrect in modern English. Why you want to consider a usage that has been considered odd/wrong/incorrect/strange sounding by all native speakers who have commented as acceptable is a mystery to me. That aside, stating blythly that it is an adverb just because it is used as one in the sentence posited and because it ends -ly is a spurious argument and potentially misleading to foreign speakers.


----------



## timpeac

Packard said:


> _He goed to Paris._ I can't imagine anyone thinking this does not sound OK and is not intellectually fine. It is quite elegant in fact.


Ok, Packard - if your aim is to accept any utterance which doesn't per se offend your intellectual or aesthetic sensibilities then I think you are arguing from a completely different angle from everyone else who are trying to give guidance to people asking questions as to what is acceptable usage. If you view "he goed to Paris" as sounding fine then you really are clutching at straws, and potentially misleading others.


----------



## emma42

There is an extremely strong argument for deeming something "incorrect" if it is not idiomatic.  Perhaps "wrong" would be a better word.  Clearly, something can be idiomatically "incorrect", whilst still managing to appear, unmarked as "archaic", in certain dictionaries.

As we all seem to agree that _cowardly _as an adverb is not idiomatic, nor to be recommended to non-natives, I suggest that the topic has probably run its course.  There is room for more discussion on what might be deemed "incorrect", but perhaps that's for another thread.

I protest at the repeated use of "English*men"*, in this thread.  I know that's off-topic, but I would have expected better from forer@s.


----------



## cuchuflete

Why are we arguing whether it's correct or incorrect?  According to the current Oxford
Compact OED, it doesn't exist as an adverb!

Is non-existence adequate proof of lack of correctness?



> — DERIVATIVES *cowardice* noun *cowardliness* noun *cowardly* adjective.



Perhaps more to the point, Cambridge Advanced Learners, which is specifically prepared for non-native speakers, omits the adverb as well.  Oxford Advanced Learners does the same.  


To re-state my earlier point, which has been overlooked in the course of this very cordial spat, from the standpoint of current idiomatic usage (which is obviously what non-natives attempt to learn) it is clearly and undeniably not correct usage.  That it may have been idiomatic some centuries ago is not germane to its current, incorrect status.


----------



## anothersmith

Most people who post questions here are non-native speakers seeking to improve their English.  If I venture to answer a question, I consider it my duty to warn them when something "sounds strange."  And I hope, whenever I post a question in the Spanish-English forum, that someone will warn me whenever a usage sounds strange.


----------



## lineaadicional

Packard said:


> In the interest of specificity I would point out that the preponderance of native speakers in this thread are Englishmen, and a different cross section of nationalities might yield a different conclusion.
> 
> The original post asked if it were incorrect to use cowardly as an adverb. I don't think it is incorrect. I did point out that I would not ordinarily use the word that way.
> 
> The consensus amongst Englishmen is that this sounds so strange as to be incorrect. I find that to be an unacceptable criteria. If every time something sounds strange it gets labeled as incorrect we would be wrong a whole lot of times.
> 
> *Strange is strange; strange is not necessarily wrong*.


 
That phrase is something I was looking for LOOOOONG time ago! Thank you, let me keep reading. And by the way, exactly! I was pointing at the word as an adberv and looks like everybody took it as an adjective first 

Now I just have two questions about I just finished to read:

I understood that intellectually, using COWARDLY as an adverb is CORRECT even though it sounds extremely weird/strange/odd... but *WHY to restrict the word only to native speakers?* Is not that selfishness? Better to teach the usage no?
ACTING COWARDLY --- *adjective or adverb?* Is the COWARDLY thing modifying the verb, isn't? So it should be an adverb, no?
Thank you all very much!
Linea


----------



## JamesM

Packard said:


> But for me, "bravely" and "cowardly" are exact opposites, and if I can use "bravely" then certainly I can use "cowardly".
> 
> He fought bravely. (Sounds fine.)
> 
> He fought cowardly. (Sounds awful; but intellectually it seems fine.)


 
I _think_ I've read through every post here and have not noticed a particular point, but if I'm repeating, please excuse me.

To me, "bravely" and "cowardly" are not functionally opposite.  They are opposite in meaning, but they are formed in a distinctly different way.

"He was a brave man" 
"He fought bravely" 
"He was a coward man" 
"He was a coward*ly* man" 
"He fought cowardly" 
"He fought cowardlyly" 

Here's where it falls apart for me. "Cowardly" is the adjective, so the "ly" is already included in the adjective. To make the adverb, my mind wants to add another "ly" to make it "cowardlyly" ("cowardlily"?), which sounds awful.

As with others, I think "He fought cowardly" sounds odd and, well, wrong. It sounds wrong because I want to tack on the "ly" that will make it shift to adverb but it already has one, and either way it sounds awkward. It sounds silly with two and incomplete with one.


----------



## lineaadicional

JamesM said:


> I _think_ I've read through every post here and have not noticed a particular point, but if I'm repeating, please excuse me.
> 
> To me, "bravely" and "cowardly" are not functionally opposite. They are opposite in meaning, but they are formed in a distinctly different way.
> 
> "He was a brave man"
> "He fought bravely"
> "He was a coward man"
> "He was a coward*ly* man"
> "He fought cowardly"
> "He fought cowardlyly"
> 
> Here's where it falls apart for me. "Cowardly" is the adjective, so the "ly" is already included in the adjective. To make the adverb, my mind wants to add another "ly" to make it "cowardlyly" ("cowardlily"?), which sounds awful.
> 
> As with others, I think "He fought cowardly" sounds odd and, well, wrong. It sounds wrong because I want to tack on the "ly" that will make it shift to adverb but it already has one, and either way it sounds awkward. It sounds silly with two and incomplete with one.


 
*It means that in English, coward and cowardly are both an adjective?*


----------



## anothersmith

lineaadicional said:


> *It means that in English, coward and cowardly are both an adjective?*



No, coward is a noun describing a person who is cowardly.  Cowardice is the state of being cowardly.


----------



## Loob

lineaadicional said:


> Now I just have two questions about I just finished to read:
> 
> I understood that intellectually, using COWARDLY as an adverb is CORRECT even though it sounds extremely weird/strange/odd... but *WHY to restrict the word only to native speakers?* Is not that selfishness? Better to teach the usage no?
> ACTING COWARDLY --- *adjective or adverb?* Is the COWARDLY thing modifying the verb, isn't? So it should be an adverb, no?


Hi again, linea.

Only one native English-speaker contributing to this thread thinks that "cowardly" as an adverb is "correct intellectually"; and even he recommends against using it.

So our collective advice is: *do not use "cowardly" as an adverb; use it only as an adjective.*

We would give the same advice to any native speaker of English who asked the question.

In "acting cowardly", "cowardly" is an adjective, not an adverb. Compare "acting stupid".




lineaadicional said:


> *It means that in English, coward and cowardly are both an adjective?*


 
"Coward" is a noun; "cowardly" is an adjective.


----------



## lineaadicional

My dictionary says that coward is an adjective as well  
Would you say "you are so *cowardly*?" then? Or better to say "you are so *coward*"?

Well, much ado about nothing... 
Don't use cowardly as an adverb, Linea! 

Thank you all.
Linea


----------



## Loob

lineaadicional said:


> My dictionary says that coward is an adjective as well  *It's not....*
> Would you say "you are so *cowardly*?" then? Or better to say "you are so *coward*"? *"You are such a coward" would be OK.*
> 
> Well, much ado about nothing...
> Don't use cowardly as an adverb, Linea!
> 
> Thank you all.
> Linea


 
You're welcome!


----------



## LV4-26

lineaadicional said:


> My dictionary says that coward is an adjective as well


MIne too. But it adds "_poet_." which means this is exclusively a poetical usage.

Don't let yourself be troubled by structures of the type [Verb + adj]" such as "_act stupid_" or "_act cowardly_", "_play dirty_" and so forth. Grammatically, they are deviations from the normal rules of sentence generation, and --if I'm not mistaken --  pretty informal.


----------



## lineaadicional

Fine...
Thank you again


----------



## Arrius

To *LV4-26.* I personally regard the construction you cite as a legitimate, not necessarily informal one, in which the adjective functions as a complement to what I would call a copulative verb similar to _to be _and _to become_ . Other examples would be to come clean (confess), to go dutch (share a bill/check), go beserk, run amok, walk tall, play fair, come quick (=be quick), remain silent, stay cool, look nice.


----------



## LV4-26

Arrius said:


> To *LV4-26.* I personally regard the construction you cite as a legitimate, not necessarily informal one, in which the adjective functions as a complement to what I would call a copulative verb similar to _to be _and _to become_.


Thanks, Arrius. An ordinary verb that would be syntactically treated as a copulative verb? That's very interesting.



> Other examples would be to come clean (confess), to go dutch (share a bill/check), go beserk, run amok, walk tall, play fair, come quick (=be quick), remain silent, stay cool, look nice.


But in this list, you're mixing truely copulative verbs (remain, stay, look) and near-copulative -- if I may call them so  --verbs (come, go) with regular ones (walk, run)?

EDIT: I won't go any further into this as it would deserve a thread of its own. I'll just add that I've found quite a few really informative elements here. And, Arrius, this page seems to go even further than you: it includes _*act*_ in the list of English copulae, which means that it's considered a linking (or copulative) verb in its own right, exactly at the same level  as _seem _or _look._I'm off to get some more information.


----------



## mhp

Forero said:


> "Acting cowardly" is like "acting stupid".  There's no adverb there.


 I agree. It is acting as an adjectival predicative here. 
 He acted cowardly and immature.


----------



## Elwintee

Packard said:


> If you are comfortable with the adverb "bravely" then there is no reason not to be comfortable with the adverb "cowardly".
> 
> *He fought bravely against a superior opponent.*
> 
> *He fought cowardly against an inferior opponent.*



I disagree, Packard.  When I first considered this usage of 'he fought cowardly' I recognised it as American English (none the worse for that, but I am a BE speaker myself).  What is wrong with the phrase, to me, is that the adjectival form *brave *indeed becomes an adverb with *-ly* added, but *coward *is not an adjective, but a noun.  *Cowardly *is an adjective and, as has been said in previous posts, would have to be turned into the unlovely *cowardlyly* in order to be a 'proper' adverb in my eyes.  I would say *'he fought in a cowardly way' *myself.  However, thinking about it, I think anyone who fights in a good cause (no matter how afraid they are) is not cowardly, it's only cowardly to run away!


----------



## mhp

Elwintee said:


> I disagree, Packard.  When I first considered this usage of 'he fought cowardly' I recognised it as American English (none the worse for that, but I am a BE speaker myself).  What is wrong with the phrase, to me, is that the adjectival form *brave *indeed becomes an adverb with *-ly* added, but *coward *is not an adjective, but a noun.  *Cowardly *is an adjective and, as has been said in previous posts, would have to be turned into the unlovely *cowardlyly* in order to be a 'proper' adverb in my eyes.  I would say *'he fought in a cowardly way' *myself.  However, thinking about it, I think anyone who fights in a good cause (no matter how afraid they are) is not cowardly, it's only cowardly to run away!


How would you apply this argument to the word "hourly"? 

hourly // adj. & adv.
adj.
1 done or occurring every hour.
2 frequent, continual.
3 reckoned hour by hour (hourly wage).
adv.
1 every hour.
2 frequently, continually.
[Oxford]


----------



## Thomas Tompion

I'm on the side of those who don't use coward, a noun, as an adjective, or cowardly, an adjective, as an adverb. I think neither use is idiomatic in modern BE.

We've been told, however, that both uses are described in dictionaries as archaic and/or poetic. Here's Shakespeare using both:

Coward as an adjective.

Phoebe in Act 3 scene 5 of As you like it, talking about her cowardly eyelids:

Tis pretty, sure, and very probable
That eyes, that are the frail'st and softest things,
Who shut their coward gates on atomies,
Should be called tyrants, butchers, murderers.

Cowardly as an adverb.

Hotspur in Act 1, scene 3 of Henry IV Part 1, in the 'Pouncet-box' speech, deploring (or rather saying how the pooftah had deplored) the way in which gunpowder has enabled soldiers to kill other soldiers, in a cowardly way, i.e. from a distance, on the battlefield:

And that it was great pity, so it was, 
This villanous salt-petre should be digg'd 
Out of the bowels of the harmless earth, 
Which many a good tall fellow had destroy'd 
So cowardly;

So the dictionaries are right, in my view, but Shakespeare is no guide to modern usage.


----------



## Arrius

The best-known instance of the use of _coward_ as an adjective is in Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar" when Cassius is slandering Caesar in an attempt to recruit Brutus to the assassination plot:
*"His coward lips did from their colour fly (I.ii.124)."*
Fine sounding, but archaic.


----------



## Elwintee

mhp said:


> How would you apply this argument to the word "hourly"?
> 
> hourly // adj. & adv.
> adj.
> 1 done or occurring every hour.
> 2 frequent, continual.
> 3 reckoned hour by hour (hourly wage).
> adv.
> 1 every hour.
> 2 frequently, continually.
> [Oxford]



I wouldn't, because if I did I'd be comparing an apple with an orange.  We can only go by usage.  There are many quirks to the English language which we just absorb as idiomatic, all I'm saying is that to me _to fight cowardly_ sounds wrong for the reason I have given, and in my experience that phrase isn't heard in BE speech.


----------



## cuchuflete

Elwintee said:


> I disagree, Packard.  When I first considered this usage of 'he fought cowardly' *I recognised it as American English* (none the worse for that, but I am a BE speaker myself).



I often fall into the trap of thinking that something which may be plausible, but is absolutely not AE, must be BE.  It appears that I may have company.  I don't recognize it ( 'he fought cowardly' ) as American English.  

It is not typical of American English.  It is odd, weird, unidiomatic, and sounds absolutely wrong in American English.  

The good Prof. Google tells us–

Results *1* - *6* of *6* for * "he fought cowardly"*.

Two of the six citations refer to this thread.


----------



## Packard

Sounds wrong; is wrong?  Not always.

Until I graduated from college I had never heard nor read the word "horrific".  When my English girlfriend (she escaped England in search of central heat) used the word I accused her of making it up from "horrible" and "terrific".   It sounded strange so I assumed it was wrong.  I checked the dictionary and I was wrong.

In the last 20 years the word has gotten more play on this side of the Atlantic displacing some of the usage of "horrible".  All of which is to say, that if something sounds strange, all it is is strange; not wrong.

While OED is the reference of choice in England, I believe that Webster's 3rd International Dictionary is the reference of choice in the USA.  Websters lists "cowardly" as an adverb with no "archaic" or "obsolete" notations as a separate entry.  It is less used, but not wrong.


----------



## cuchuflete

Packard said:


> While OED is the reference of choice in England, I believe that Webster's 3rd International Dictionary is the reference of choice in the USA.



Fiddlesticks!  Webster's Third is a good dictionary.  It is far from the most used one,
and has no claim on being more authoritative or "better" than many others.  "...the reference of choice" for what purpose?  Etymology? Frequency of use? I have no reason or desire to demean the Webster's Third in any way, but putting it up on an artificial pedestal serves no useful purpose in an attempt to defend a part of speech designation for a word that is not used, in modern English, as that label suggests. 

Many words in dictionaries are not used in idiomatic speech or writing.  They exist, and pass muster with respected lexicographers.  That doesn't mean that native speakers should roll over and form judgments of usage based on "it's in the dictionary".  

Let's consider the thread topic:  "Cowardly >> Archaism?"  As an adverb, cowardly is not used with any frequency in modern English.  It may be old-fashioned, out-of-date, obsolete, archaic, or just extremely rare.  Nobody in this thread has presented a shred of evidence to suggest that it is, or should be, used as an adverb in today's English.

"But it's not wrong!!!!!!"   Maybe.   It's certainly not right.


----------



## mhp

Elwintee said:


> I wouldn't, because if I did I'd be comparing an apple with an orange.  We can only go by usage.  There are many quirks to the English language which we just absorb as idiomatic, all I'm saying is that to me _to fight cowardly_ sounds wrong for the reason I have given, and in my experience that phrase isn't heard in BE speech.


 I’m glad that we agree that the reason it is not used as an adverb in BrE is not because of cowardlyly or hourlyly. Obviously, it is no longer used as an adverb in modern BrE because of common usage as verified by Oxford.

  I really did not know that and I'm surprised. 

Of course, for AmE usage I consult American English dictionaries. It has already been mentioned that Merriam-Webster treats this as an adverb without marking it as archaic. So does my old copy of the American Heritage Dictionary (second college edition): cowardly -adv In the manner of a coward.

  Some examples that I do not find particularly odd sounding: (inspired by google) 
He bravely fought in a war rather than cowardly sit at home.
Port authorities quietly, if not cowardly, took down the tree in the middle of the night. 
"Yes I will," he said, cowardly staring at a long...
etc.

Do these sound odd to other AmE speakers?


----------



## cuchuflete

> Some examples that I do not find particularly odd sounding: (inspired by google)
> He bravely fought in a war rather than cowardly sit at home.
> Port authorities quietly, if not cowardly, took down the tree in the middle of the night.
> "Yes I will," he said, cowardly staring at a long...
> etc.
> 
> Do these sound odd to other AmE speakers?


 They sound odd to me.


----------



## JamesM

mhp said:


> I’m glad that we agree that the reason it is not used as an adverb in BrE is not because of cowardlyly or hourlyly. Obviously, it is no longer used as an adverb in modern BrE because of common usage as verified by Oxford.
> 
> I really did not know that and I'm surprised.
> 
> Of course, for AmE usage I consult American English dictionaries. It has already been mentioned that Merriam-Webster treats this as an adverb without marking it as archaic. So does my old copy of the American Heritage Dictionary (second college edition): cowardly -adv In the manner of a coward.
> 
> Some examples that I do not find particularly odd sounding: (inspired by google)
> He bravely fought in a war rather than cowardly sit at home.
> Port authorities quietly, if not cowardly, took down the tree in the middle of the night.
> "Yes I will," he said, cowardly staring at a long...
> etc.
> 
> Do these sound odd to other AmE speakers?


 
Absolutely.


----------



## lineaadicional

cuchuflete said:


> Many words in dictionaries are not used in idiomatic speech or writing. They exist, and pass muster with respected lexicographers. That doesn't mean that native speakers should roll over and form judgments of usage based on "it's in the dictionary".


 
Who else should I trust?




Packard said:


> Sounds wrong; is wrong? Not always.
> It is less used, but not wrong.


 
Good point 



cuchuflete said:


> I often fall into the trap of thinking that something which may be plausible, but is absolutely not AE, must be BE. It appears that I may have company. I don't recognize it ( 'he fought cowardly' ) as American English.
> 
> It is not typical of American English. It is odd, weird, unidiomatic, and sounds absolutely wrong in American English.
> 
> The good Prof. Google tells us–
> 
> Results *1* - *6* of *6* for *"he fought cowardly"*.
> 
> Two of the six citations refer to this thread.


 
I wouldn't say that something is correct or not just because google... I mean, google is not a proof enough to me


----------



## Arrius

Google gives the majority opinion, which is as often as not wrong. More often in English than other languages, variations that start off as slips, mistakes or downright slovenliness, are rapidly taken up and spread like wildfire, soon to become current standard usage, including by the BBC...Beware the Google!


----------



## Loob

Good to see you're still with us, Linea!

I think what's happening here is (in part, but not entirely) a debate between those who trust dictionaries; and those who trust in their own experience of the language.

Sometimes, I learn from a dictionary that my own understanding is incomplete _(this happened to me in a recent thread)._

Sometimes, I find that although a dictionary permits something, it is in practice - for me - completely unsayable.

You ask "who should you trust?"  The answer, in the end, is listen to all the views and all the evidence; then form a judgement. 

As to the google-point: you're right, google is not conclusive.  But if there are very few google hits on a construction, that's a valid part of the evidence.


----------



## ewie

Hello Linea.
I've just found this entry in the little-known dictionary UED (sometimes mistakenly called ewieD):

*cowardly* _[adj.]_*. timid, pusillanimous.* [may also be used as an _adv._ but *only* when addressing Mr.Packard of the USA, and even _he_ won't like it]


----------



## Thomas Tompion

There's a further point: some Google quotes are better evidence than others. There are four Google quotes, apart from those from this thread, for he fought cowardly: two are from boxers or boxing fans (the boy done good is the general tone); one is from the works of Topsy Grets - judge for yourselves; the fourth is from someone commenting on the film Gladiator: here's a taste of her prose -
When watching this movie, it is hard to feel sorrowful towards Commodus because of the way he treated Maximus. He fought cowardly and cheated! 

I don't think we've been presented with much evidence from Google that literate people these days use cowardly as an adverb.


----------



## lineaadicional

Loob said:


> Good to see you're still with us, Linea!
> 
> I think what's happening here is (in part, but not entirely) a debate between those who trust dictionaries; and those who trust in their own experience of the language.
> 
> Sometimes, I learn from a dictionary that my own understanding is incomplete _(this happened to me in a recent thread)._
> 
> Sometimes, I find that although a dictionary permits something, it is in practice - for me - completely unsayable.
> 
> You ask "who should you trust?" The answer, in the end, is listen to all the views and all the evidence; then form a judgement.
> 
> As to the google-point: you're right, google is not conclusive. But if there are very few google hits on a construction, that's a valid part of the evidence.


 
Thank you. I do really want to have an answer (a clear one) about my question and I am liking (he he) all this points of veiw. I'll take my own decision based on how this thread will be done... Why? Because I _used to use_ this word and, according to me, as an adverb. 

I even asked to an English native speaker already (face to face). He teaches English in a Russian University and he told me that the usage indeed is correct but rarely used. If ever you want to sound special, odd, funny or you just want to show yourself off, then use it and nobody could make any asseveration about the _wrongness_ of the adverb 

And yes, yes... you al all right. Dictionaries say always a lot of true that one may become con_fuzzy_. What a surprise with this every-day-changing English!

I'll go on...
Hugs


----------



## lineaadicional

ewie said:


> Hello Linea.
> I've just found this entry in the little-known dictionary UED (sometimes mistakenly called ewieD):
> 
> *cowardly* _[adj.]_*. timid, pusillanimous.* [may also be used as an _adv._ but *only* when addressing Mr.Packard of the USA, and even _he_ won't like it]


Hahahahaha... I guess somebody is going to delete your comment 



Thomas Tompion said:


> There's a further point: some Google quotes are better evidence than others. There are four Google quotes, apart from those from this thread, for he fought cowardly: two are from boxers or boxing fans (the boy done good is the general tone); one is from the works of Topsy Grets - judge for yourselves; the fourth is from someone commentating on the film Gladiator: here's a taste of her prose -
> When watching this movie, it is hard to feel sorrowful towards Commodus because of the way he treated Maximus. He fought cowardly and cheated!
> 
> I don't think we've been presented with much evidence from Google that literate people these days use cowardly as an adverb.


 
You see? Google wasn't a good choice this time


----------



## Loob

lineaadicional said:


> .I even asked to an English native speaker already (face to face). He teaches English in a Russian University and he told me that the usage indeed is correct but rarely used. If ever you want to sound special, odd, funny or you just want to show yourself off, then use it and nobody could make any asseveration about the _wrongness_ of the adverb


 
I think your English-teaching friend is right.  "Cowardly" as an adverb may be theoretically "correct" but it is simply not used.

Abrazos right back to you


----------



## Thomas Tompion

As further evidence that you shouldn't regard the four Google entries for he fought cowardly as important evidence for cowardly's correct use as an adverb, please note that there are 131 entries for he fought brave.  So brave is thirty times as acceptable as cowardly in adverbial use ?


----------



## cuchuflete

You miss the point of the Google analysis.  There were very few citations.  The quality
of the English in them is not good.  Do you want to use a mere four examples of sloppy English to justify the use of a term?

Summing up-

1.  The word is not inherently "wrong" as an adverb,  but it is essentially "wrong" if you
want to speak or write idiomatic, modern English, for the simple reason that it is not idiomatic. It is not used as an adverb.  If it were used as an adverb other than very rarely, you would find thousands of instances of such use in _corpora_, including Google.

2. One member of this conversation advocated using cowardly as an adverb, and then changed his mind.  All other participants recommend against the usage.

3. Some dictionaries call it archaic, others do not.  Some good dictionaries do not list the word as an adverb at all, including two reliable dictionaries for 'advanced learners'.

4. Given this array of inclusion, exclusion, and varying classification, the lexicographic world is clearly not of one consistent viewpoint.  This variety should be an alert to a careful learner.  Of the dictionaries that list the word as an adverb, and do not call it archaic, few or none provide sample sentences.  That may be a second alert to a careful dictionary user.

If you wish to sound old-fashioned or odd—or like someone who hasn't quite mastered the language he is speaking—you are welcome to use _cowardly_ as an adverb. If questioned by a native, you can attempt to explain or excuse yourself by saying, "But, it's in the dictionary!"  

 If you prefer to emulate more accomplished native and non-native speakers of English, you will avoid using the word as an adverb.


----------



## mhp

cuchuflete said:


> They sound odd to me.





JamesM said:


> Absolutely.


  Thank you for you comments. I wonder why they don’t sound particularly odd to me. How would you “fix” these simple examples so that they are acceptable to you?

  As for Google results, it is very difficult to include only adverbial usage without including the adjectival usage: They have the same form!

  Here are some more Google hits that I think only include the adverbial usage. I had to use a split infinitive and only a few simple verbs: To cowardly go, sit, kill, and take. 

  To see how tricky this Google search result is, consider the search result: cowardly killed.


----------



## panjandrum

This thread has become a silly game rather than a serious discussion of actual usage in the real world.
I would have wished it to conclude after cuchu's summary.

It has now concluded.


----------

