Proofs redux

[la_marquise]

So, having looked at the electronic set that I received this a.m. and spotted this in the middle of p. 1'G. looked enquiringly' (and checked my MS and found that I had not in fact committed that sentence -- mine original reads 'G looked enquiring') I enquired of the marquis if the new version was by any stretch possibly grammatically correct. It looked wrong to me, but US grammar is another creature. He thought it might be all right, though I was not convinced. (On the one hand, he went to a posh school that taught formal grammar. On the other, he's a mathematician.) As a result, I trotted off into town in search of a book on US English grammar and a US dictionary.
I am now the proud owner of a large heavy copy of The Chicago Manual of Style (15th edition. It's Bright Orangey Red. So unlike my much loved Cambridge Handbook of Copy-Editing in its sober grey plumage) and a Merriam Webster Dictionary to guide me through this new world of transatlantic spelling and grammar and punctuation. (Capitalisation after a colon! That looks so wrong to me!)
And yea, lo and verily, I am right about that sentence. According CMS 5.158, 'Adverbs do not generally follow linking verbs such as be, appear, seem, become, look...'
That -ly is history.

Comments

[zanda-myrande.livejournal.com]

Yes, this is what I was about to say. If G is looking at someone or something then I would use the adverb. I know eight out of ten doctors say they're bad for you, but I'm sure it's all right if you use them in moderation and go for a brisk walk afterwards. But if he's just appearing, then the adjective is right. One is transitive and the other intransitive, but I can never remember which is which.