> David J. Peterson <dedalvs@...> wrote:
> >See below for a paper contrasting -ly adverbs and temporal/locative
> >adverbs (in HTML form):
> >
> >
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?
> >hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=off&q=cache:jvJaBsbEibUJ:www.sakura.cc.tsukuba.a
> >c.jp/~hidekazu/Paper/ly-adverb.pdf+temporal+adverbs+as+nouns
>
> Note that that resource listed the phrase "at the store" as an adverb. You
> won't find many linguists that will agree. It's a prepositional phrase. You
> have a noun, a determiner, and a preposition; thus, there's a noun phrase
> and a prepositional phrase (and according to minimalism, at least, a
> determiner phrase).
>
> So if your definition of "adverb" includes prepositional phrases, then yes,
> the string "yesterday" can be an adverb, but only if it's a proper noun (to
> account for the lack of a determiner) with a null preposition. Most
> linguists list adverbs as words, not phrases, and distinguish prepositions
> from adverbs. At least the ones I've encountered; anyone using a Chomskyan
> approach to syntax does.
>
> What syntactic framework are you using? Or rather, what's being used at the
> University of Tsukuba, from which you got that paper?