Technically, the adverbial form of ordinal numbers (ranking) is considered proper usage, i.e. Firstly, The apples were rotten, Secondly, They were not marked, etc.  Yet I personally prefer the non-adverbial form, i.e. First, The apples were rotten, etc.  This form can be equally justified, stylistically, as an ellipsis, i.e. First (of all), The apples were rotten, etc.     Any comments on this preference?  I just don't like the adverbial form, although I know it's the correct _style_. There is nothing wrong grammatically or colloquially with First, this; second, that; third, something else.... .  The ordinal numbers may be used as adjectives or adverbs. Firstly , secondly , and so forth are generally used when enumerating wordier things; for instance, whole paragraphs, or phrases in which the words first , second , &c., might be used in another context.

In our last episode,  < This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it , the lovely and talented magna10 broadcast on alt.usage.english: m Technically, the adverbial form of ordinal numbers (ranking) is m considered proper usage, i.e. Firstly, The apples were rotten, m Secondly, They were not marked, etc.  Yet I personally prefer the m non-adverbial form, i.e. First, The apples were rotten, etc.  This m form can be equally justified, stylistically, as an ellipsis, m i.e. First (of all), The apples were rotten, etc.  Any comments on m this preference?  I just don't like the adverbial form, although I m know it's the correct _style_. Is this a troll?  As a moment with a dictionary would have showed you, first is an adverb.  

Technically, the adverbial form of ordinal numbers (ranking) is considered proper usage, i.e. Firstly, The apples were rotten, Secondly, They were not marked, etc.  Yet I personally prefer the non-adverbial form, i.e. First, The apples were rotten, etc.  This form can be equally justified, stylistically, as an ellipsis, i.e. First (of all), The apples were rotten, etc.     Any comments on this preference?  I just don't like the adverbial form, although I know it's the correct _style_.

the lovely and talented magna10 broadcast on alt.usage.english: m Technically, the adverbial form of ordinal numbers (ranking) is m considered proper usage, i.e. Firstly, The apples were rotten, m Secondly, They were not marked, etc.  Yet I personally prefer the m non-adverbial form, i.e. First, The apples were rotten, etc.  This m form can be equally justified, stylistically, as an ellipsis, m i.e. First (of all), The apples were rotten, etc.  Any comments on m this preference?  I just don't like the adverbial form, although I m know it's the correct _style_. Is this a troll?  As a moment with a dictionary would have showed you, first is an adverb.   It can be an adverb but not as it is used above. Spend another moment with your dictionary. It was a reasonable question that shouldn't have been subjected to a sarcastic answer. Charles Riggs

Firstly , secondly , and so forth are generally used when enumerating wordier things; for instance, whole paragraphs, or phrases in which the words first , second , &c., might be used in another context. For me, the -ly forms are most at home in formal enunciations of points in an argument

Curtis Smith < This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it writes: There is nothing wrong grammatically or colloquially with First, this; second, that; third, something else.... .  The ordinal numbers may be used as adjectives or adverbs. In fact, the bare adverbs are older than the -ly forms.  See the OED.  Oddly enough, firstly was invented last of all.  There are still some semi-old-fashioned people who make it first, secondly, thirdly,... . I'm one of those semi-old-fashioned people.  Eric Partridge reckons that firstly is inferior to first ; but doesn't explain why. John