Silvennoinen (2025) analyzes the stored sequence going forward as an adverb that inherits adverb-class morphosyntax. This reply challenges that categorization on empirical grounds. The construction fails the key distributional test for adverbs: it cannot occur in integrated-medial position between subject and verb (*We going forward will prioritize replication), the diagnostic slot for core adverbs (We certainly will prioritize replication). Analysis of Silvennoinen’s corpus (n = 1,517) confirms this restriction – apparent ‘medial’ tokens prove either to be NP-internal modifiers or parenthetical supplements, never integrated clausal constituents. Instead, going forward patterns with PP adjuncts, occurring clause-initially, clause-finally, or as supplements. Internally, deverbal going heads the construction and licenses a directional complement forward(s), parallel to established deverbal prepositions like according [to …] and depending [on …]. The construction thus projects PP, not AdvP, aligning with The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language’s flexible-complement analysis of prepositions. This case demonstrates that storage and semantic specialization do not force categorical reanalysis.