Adverbs of essence 85
A collocational analysis shows a semantic preference of basically for colloca-
tion with concepts of similarity and (to a lesser extent) difference (2008a: 154).
Further, it tends to occur together with expressions such as I think, I mean, you
know, just (Butler 2008b: 56–59). These are pragmatic particles (discourse mark-
ers) which express strongly subjective meanings, the speaker’s wish to tone down
the message and to negotiate his or her attitude with the addressee. Butler puts it
like this:
These findings (...) suggest that basically is often preceded by interpersonal devices
which soften the expression of the speaker or writer’s opinion that some particular
aspect of a phenomenon is its most central property. (2008b: 154–155)Essentially is also, like basically, connected with concepts of similarity and dif-
ference. Further, there are strong collocational links with the verb remain com-
bined with the adverb still. Butler finds that “essentially is frequently used in
circumstances where the speaker wishes to indicate that the inherent qualities of
something stay constant” (Butler 2008a: 156). Finally, fundamentally appears to
be especially associated with change and with difference. Strikingly, it also often
collocates with negative evaluations expressed by such words as flawed, wrong and
opposed (Butler 2008a: 157).
A third parameter for comparing the adverbs is their position in the clause.
Butler (2008a) finds the following differences in syntactic behaviour: basically
occurs more often in initial and final position than would be expected from the
null hypothesis of no association and more often than the other two adverbs;
essentially occurs more often after relational verbs and fundamentally has a higher
frequency in pre-adjectival position (Butler 2008a: 166–167). Initial basically is
further significantly more frequent in speech than in writing, which suggests again
a development towards pragmatic marker usage.
The above summary of Butler’s findings indicates that the adverbs, which are
practically synonymous judging from dictionary definitions, nevertheless appear
to differ from one another in terms of semantic and syntactic preferences as well
as pragmatic development. In the following section their respective uses will be
illustrated and further commented on.
- The adverbs illustrated
Quirk et al. (1985: §8.127) follow Greenbaum (1969) in classifying basically, essen-
tially and fundamentally as content disjuncts which “state the sense in which the
speaker judges what he says to be true or false”. More specifically they form a
sub-class of adverbs that “claim that what is being said is true in principle”. Let