6

In a footnote at the bottom of page 123 of A Student's Introduction to English Grammar (2005; by Huddleston and Pullum), I found mention of a construction in which adverbs modify nouns:

There is a construction where we find an adverb modifying a noun, as in Industrial action resulted in the withdrawal indefinitely of the vehicular ferry service or A shortage of timber internationally led to a steep rise in prices. This construction is subject to severe constraints; most importantly, adverbial modifiers of nouns are restricted to post-head position – compare the indefinite withdrawal of the vehicular ferry service, where the pre-head modifier is required to be an adjective. There are also constraints on the kind of adverb permitted. Manner adverbs, for example, are normally excluded, so that we have his angry reaction, but not *his reaction angrily.

Further research directed me to some discussion in a paper by the same two authors along with John Payne, The distribution and category status of adjectives and adverbs (page 13 of 51):

(17) (a) [The unique role globally of the Australian Health Promoting Schools Association], as a non-government organization specifically established to promote the concept of the health promoting school, is described. [...]

Example (17a) shows firstly that the nouns which head this construction are not necessarily deverbal: we do not have *It roled globally. Secondly, although there is a related adjective global which can be used as a premodifier in the NP
[1.] the unique global role of the Australian [...] Association,
the meaning of this NP is subtly different from that of the NP in (17a). Whereas in (17a)
we are talking simply about the location in which the role is performed (globally as opposed, say, to nationally), the use of the adjective strongly invites the inference that the role is an important one. (emphasis added)

How does "the use of the adjective strongly [invite] the inference that the role is an important one"? I don't perceive this difference between (17)(a) and the example denoted as [1.].

What are the semantic similarities and differences?

Improve this question
2
  • This is related to Law Area's previous question: ell.stackexchange.com/q/53699/230
    – user230
    May 10, 2015 at 2:36
  • They make those claims but I see no basis for them, really. The importance, internationally, of such a measure is moot. = The international importance of such a measure is moot. Same thing, as far I'm concerned.
    – Lambie
    Feb 11, 2021 at 14:34

5 Answers 5

Reset to default
1

My personal opinion, although I can't back it up with references off-hand, is that this sentence is actually wrong and should be "The globally unique role" or "The unique role played globally". Certainly, whether it's grammatically correct or not, this reads as an awkward monstrosity of a sentence to me.

Improve this answer
0

This is based on how each sentence breaks down. For the first sentence,

The unique role globally...

'unique' modifies 'role', so the role is unique. Then 'globally' modifies 'unique role', saying that the role is performed in a global context.

In the second sentence,

The unique global role...

'global' modifies 'role' first, becoming 'global role'. Then, 'unique' modifies 'global role'. Effectively, the fact that the role is global is also (part of) what makes it unique.

Improve this answer
2
  • 1
    Au contraire. The first says that their role is unique in all the world (no one else on the globe has that same role). It says nothing about where they perform that role. The second clearly says that their role is global in scope, and nobody else has a role of global scope that is similar. The difference is that with the adverb following, it can and will be construed as applying to the adjective preceding, not the noun.
    – Brian Hitchcock
    May 14, 2015 at 11:55
  • I would argue that it is: the unique role [played] globally and the unique global role are semantically equivalent. I fail to see how globally does not imply verb play. And, in fact, I would write it like this: The unique role, globally, etc.
    – Lambie
    Feb 11, 2021 at 14:21
0

The unique role globally of the Australian...vs the unique global role of the Australian...the use of the adjective strongly invites the inference that the role is an important one.

My Answer

The unique role, globally, of the Australian... (I have added comas to inject some clarity to my explanation).

this sentence does not state that it is a global role, but infers that a local role has a global influence and in this instance that it is unique ('unique' modifies 'role', so the role is unique).

the unique global role of the Australian... This states that the role has a global status rather than just influence and the Australians are the only ones to have this particular international role ('unique' modifies 'global role', so the global role is unique). The promotion of the role to a global one imports a higher status than a mere national one. Hence the statement "the use of the adjective strongly invites the inference that the role is an important one"

global adjective (WORLD): relating to the whole world:

Changes like this will impact on the global economy.

Ref CED global

Improve this answer
0

(17a) The unique role globally ...

(17b) The unique global role ...

As Payne et al. (2010) argues, "whereas in (17a) we are talking simply about the location in which the role is performed (globally as opposed, say, to nationally)."

What this means is that in (17a), the focus is the location. The unique role that Australian Health Promoting Schools Association has is international (relating to the nations outside Australia).

In (17b), on the other hand, the focus is the role. Australian Health Promoting Schools Association has a unique role that is recognized and respected by every nation.

Improve this answer
0

The difference between prepositive adjectives (adjectives that appear before the noun they modify) and postpositive adjectives (adjectives that appear after the noun they modify) in English is prepositive adjectives are generally restrictive, whereas postpositive adjectives are generally nonrestrictive.

When a modifier is restrictive, it means that it is restricting the noun to just that modification, so a "global role" is a "role" that is only "global" and nothing else.

When a modifier is nonrestrictive, it means that it is not restricting the noun to just that modification, so "role globally" is suggestive that the role is wider-ranging or more faceted than simply a "global role," so if I say "Australia's role globally..." I am acknowledging that that's just one part of its role, like Australia's role doesn't just include its role globally but also includes its role domestically, for example.

While the "global role" doesn't preclude the existence of a "domestic role" or any other role, it also doesn't include its existence or acknowledge in any way that it or any other roles could exist because the "role" is restrictively nothing but "global," whereas "role globally" nonrestrictively refers to only one aspect of what may be a multifaceted role, the implication being that Australia's role has additional aspects or facets, such as domestically, regionally, British-Commonwealthily, Pan-Pacifically, etc.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.