Mfcttrf

I know that the adverb modifies a verb except for in some limited cases such as verbs of the senses or copula.

"It tastes good.", not "It tastes well."

"It looks good.", not "It looks well."

"It seems good.", not "It seems well."

"It appears good.", not "It appears well."

Etc

However, I have noticed that at times it seems that go can substitute for some verbs of the senses such as in…

"That color goes good with your complexion." (looks)

"Cheddar cheese goes good with burgers." (tastes)

In spite of an answer to a similar question, I am not satisfied.

I did an Ngram search, and it seems that “good” can be used with go when discussing “looks” or “taste”, although it is not often seen in print.

I have searched through 3 pages of the 9th print edition of OALD, and cannot find support for the idea: however…

Can Go substitute for some verbs of the senses, and so take an adjective rather than an adverb?

Is there some kind of an explanation to describe the (mis)usage, or is just a matter of “correctness”?

sense verbs or sensory verbs are generally intransitive:

They are: look, seem, taste, feel, smell, and sound.

They all can be followed by adjectives.

You look good.

He sounds terrible.

That tastes scrumptious. [all adjectives]

the verb go is an action or active verb. Therefore, it needs an adverb:

• This wine goes well with that cheese.


• That color goes badly with your skin tone.


• That pictures goes horribly with this decor. [all adverbs]

So, this question is easily solved.

If someone says, "This wine goes good with that cheese." that marks the speaker as unschooled. I am sorry to say it but that is the way of the world, which I did not invent and which I am not judging by saying that.

My initial response to this question was . . . "Ewwww. That's just incorrect. It should be well, not good."

Then, upon further reflection, I took your premise into account. Is the word go being used as a sensory verb here.

I do not believe it is. Rather I think this is merely informal usage of the word good, not the transmogrification of the word go into a sensory verb.

Notice that I am not saying incorrect usage, but rather informal usage. Frustrating as it may be, we have to allow for the fact that usage is what defines language. Much of what we consider correct today was probably informal usage a century (or even a decade) ago.

You can look at it from three different angles

The first-

Go is a Delexical verb, meaning -

de·lex·i·cal

/dēˈleksikəl/

adjective LINGUISTICS

(of a verb) having little or no meaning in its own right, for example take in take a photograph.

That is, it's a very "phrasy" verb.

here are just a few examples of how go is not to be taken literally

• an attempt or try -he had a go at the stamp business (though a noun)


• animal sounds - The cow goes moo.


• to give access : LEAD That door goes to the cellar


• to be in general or on an average cheap, as yachts go
  

examples (dictionary.com / Miriam Webster)

and so on...
and so you could easily see why this verb might clad itself in different meanings.

The second -

Go might be considered sometimes as a Stative and or Dynamic verb (as
all "sense" verbs are).
Those are verbs that do not describe an action but rather a state (more similar in meaning to an adjective, though in a sentence structure they are the verb. easily noticeable for they can't be said in continuous tenses and they don't take an object(intransitive). as in one of the examples above -
to give access : LEAD That door goes to the cellar.
surely the door makes no such verb as to go, it simply describes the state of the door.
All Stative Verbs belong to a bigger family called linking verbs,such as be,seem..., and therefore can and will be followed by an adjective(complement).

The third -

your example might simply be an elliptical sentences that originally used the phrase -
go hand in hand with.

as in "That color goes hand in hand with your complexion." (looks)

go hand in hand
Of two things, to accompany one another harmoniously.
thefreedictionary.com

Due to the nature of how languages work, if enough people use this format (which is most certainly true) then it becomes grammatically acceptable. Sort of how '10 items or less' is equally as grammatically correct as '10 items or fewer.'