Talk:secondly

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

Alleged Impropriety[edit]

I found no evidence suggesting secondly to be grammatically incorrect; rather, several reliable sources suggested that, while "second, third..." are valid as adverbs, "secondly, thirdly..." are equally acceptable. See, for example, AskOxford [1]. Merriam-Webster lists both "second" and "secondly", while Fowler regards "firstly, secondly, thirdly..." as more correct than the "pedantic" alternative. The assertion that secondly is "grammatically incorrect and should not be used" seems dubious in the face of this evidence, and has no place in the article if, as is currently the case, no source is provided. Sylvie (Talk) 03:41, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, first of all, I'd say you didn't look very hard. This has one discourse on it. Secondly, "secondly" itself isn't strongly proscribed, but firstly is (by everyone except Fowler.) [2], Example proscription. You can search for plenty more, that go into some of the finer debates. Here you can read another view on why. --Connel MacKenzie 13:52, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
proscribed ... by everyone except Fowler”. No. this is not sooth. According to firstly#Usage_notes OED has not stated its attitude, thence appertains to the exceptions as well. Id est, at least two leading dictionaries do not support the proscription. In Wiktionary:Tea_room#firstly I advocated the removal of this encumbering tag from the entry. Leading contemporary philosophers make use of it (link to the quotation here), thence it is incontestably in circulation amongst the leading writers which eo ipso refutes the proscribed claim. Literature and proscribed are incongruous. Bogorm 11:21, 10 February 2009 (UTC)