Still used in the non-ironic sense here in Texas, if the speaker wants to give a sort of old-fashioned, earnest tone to what he's saying.

No, because we're too lazy to tweak the cliched phrase for grammar agreement. :)

"Worst-case" is a compound adjective that I've also seen modifying words like "performance" and "outcome." The use with "scenario" was popularized by a morbid, but cute, little yellow book called "The Worst-Case Scenario Handbook." (Don't ask.)

I'm not sure where the phrase originated, but my guess would be in military strategy, where several (i.e. more than two) projected results of any given decision would naturally be examined.

Oh, pish-posh. :)

"Modern" French (that is, not Old French) is probably responsible for most, if not all, English words beginning with a silent H. It has nothing to do with the ancient English pronunciation rule governing the use of "a" and "an."

Well, it depends. "Beforehand" can be an adjective or an adverb. Check this out: http://poets.notredame.ac.jp/cgi-bin/wn?cmd=wn&word=beforehand

Adjective example: "Maximilian was beforehand in his marriage proposal to Clarissa." (In other words, he proposed before he had asked Clara's daddy; he should have waited until the right time.)

Adverb example without "-ly": "Maximilian should not have proposed beforehand."

Adverb example with "-ly": "Maximilian looked soulfully at Clarissa, and declared beforehandedly, 'I'll have you as my wife, whatever your father says!'"

I remember reading, in American novels more than a hundred years old, "directly" used in the same way. Probably the usage has just fallen out of currency here in the States.

Oh, Christ, I'm so asleep. I had better not come back until after coffee time.

I meant "proactively," not "presumptively," which will not do. I'll stay on the case and report back after the caffeine kicks in.

"Beforehandedly" would be the correct way to form the adverb, if you wanted, but look up "presumptively" and see if it doesn't have the meaning you want.

"Frilly" was a terrible example, I do admit.

(Monday morning... better have that cup of coffee now!)

I can think of at least one case in which American English speakers don't use an object with the verb "reach":

"Reach over and I'll hand you your coffee."
"I'm trying, but I can't reach."

In the second quote, there's an implied object (as if it said "...I can't reach it"), but in the first, there appears to truly be no object.

I remember hearing, one day at work, a manager from India use "reach" in the way you describe. I though at first it was just imperfect English, but apparently it's a perfectly acceptable construction in the English spoken in India.

lysdexia, goossun learned English, I gather, through his continual study and travel abroad. You must be one of my fellow Americans, because you appear to think that people who have trouble with certain aspects of English are ignorant (and goossun, whatever else he might be, is far from ignorant; trust me on this.) :)

The issue at hand appears to be whether a rule exists to help you choose "-ly" or "-ally" when making an adjective (typically) into an adverb.

Well, "typically" is a good word to analyze. You begin with the word "typical," then you add the adverbial "-ly." Most (if not all) words ending in "-ally" have an adjective with "-al," such as "usually" ("usual") and "tragically" (from "tragical," now obsolete).

The other case of adverbs that appear to end in "-lly" is when you make an adverb out of an adjective ending with "-ll," such as "fully" ("full") or "frilly" ("frill").

For most adjectives, you do make adverbs by just adding "-ly." There are some exceptions that have to be learned individually, such as "slily" ("sly") and "simply" ("simple").