| English grammar series |
|---|
|
|
|
|
In English, as in many other languages, the subject of a verb in the passive voice corresponds to the object of the same verb in the active voice. English's passive voice is periphrastic; that is, it does not have a one-word form. Rather, it is formed using a form of the auxiliary verb be together with a verb's past participle.
Passive voice can be used in any number of tenses.
Contents |
Passive constructions have a range of meanings and uses. The canonical use is to map a clause with a direct object to a corresponding clause where the direct object has become the subject. For example:
Here threw is a transitive verb with John as its subject and the ball as its direct object. If we recast the verb in the passive voice (was thrown), then the ball becomes the subject (it is promoted to the subject position) and John disappears:
The original subject can typically be re-inserted using the preposition by:
One non-canonical use of English's passive is to promote an object other than a direct object. It is usually possible in English to promote indirect objects as well. For example:
In the active form, gave is the verb; John is its subject, Mary its indirect object, and a book its direct object. In the passive forms, the indirect object has been promoted and the direct object has been left in place. (In "A book was given to Mary", the direct object is promoted and the indirect object left in place. In this respect, English resembles dechticaetiative languages.)
It is also possible, in some cases, to promote the object of a preposition:
In the passive form here, the preposition is "stranded"; that is, it is not followed by an object. (See Preposition stranding.) Indeed, in some sense it doesn't have an object, since "the problem" is actually the subject of the sentence.
It is possible to promote a content clause that serves as a direct object. In this case, however, it typically does not change its position in the sentence, and an expletive it takes the normal subject position:
The passives described so far have all been eventive (or dynamic) passives. There exist also stative (or static, or resultative) passives; rather than describing an action, they describe the result of an action. English does not usually distinguish between the two. For example:
This sentence has two different meanings, roughly the following:
The former meaning represents the canonical, eventive passive; the latter, the stative passive. (The terms eventive and stative/resultative refer to the tendencies of these forms to describe events and resultant states, respectively. The terms can be misleading, however, as the canonical passive of a stative verb is not a stative passive, even though it describes a state.)
Some verbs do not form stative passives. In some cases, this is because distinct adjectives exist for this purpose, such as with the verb open:
Adjectival passives are not true passives; they occur when a participial adjective (an adjective derived from a participle) is used predicatively (see Adjective). For example:
Here, relieved is an ordinary adjective, though it derives from the past participle of relieve,[1] and that past participle may be used in canonical passives:
In some cases, the line between an adjectival passive and a stative passive may be unclear.
In a few cases, passive constructions retain all the sense of the passive voice, but do not have immediate active counterparts. For example:
(The asterisk here denotes an ungrammatical construction.) Similarly:
In both of these examples, the active counterpart was once possible, but has fallen out of use.
It is possible for a verb in the passive voice — especially an object-raising verb — to take an infinitive complement that is also in the passive voice:
Commonly, either or both verbs may be moved into the active voice:
In some cases, a similar construction may occur with a verb that is not object-raising in the active voice:
(The question mark here denotes a questionably-grammatical construction.) In this example, the object of the infinitive has been promoted to the subject of the main verb, and both the infinitive and the main verb have been moved to the passive voice. The American Heritage Book of English Usage declares this unacceptable,[2] but it is nonetheless attested in a variety of contexts.[3]
A past participle alone usually carries passive force; the form of be can therefore be omitted in certain circumstances, such as signs, newspaper headlines, and reduced relative clauses:
While the ordinary passive construction uses the auxiliary be, using get in its place can sometimes achieve the same effect:
This use of get is fairly restricted. First of all, it is fairly colloquial; be is used in news reports, formal writing, and so on. Second, it typically only forms eventive passives of eventive verbs.
An ergative verb is a verb that may be either transitive or intransitive, and whose subject when it is intransitive plays the same semantic role as its direct object when it is transitive. For example, fly is an ergative verb, such that the following sentences are roughly synonymous:
One major difference is that the intransitive construction does not permit an agent to be mentioned, and indeed can imply that no agent is present, that the subject is performing the action on itself. For this reason, the intransitive construction of an ergative verb is often said to be in a middle voice, between active and passive, or in a mediopassive voice, between active and passive but closer to passive.
A reflexive verb is a transitive verb one of whose objects is a reflexive pronoun (myself, yourself, etc.) referring back to its subject. In some languages, reflexive verbs are a special class of verbs with special semantics and syntax, but in English, they typically represent ordinary uses of transitive verbs. For example, with the verb see:
Nonetheless, sometimes English reflexive verbs have a passive sense, expressing an agentless action. Consider the verb solve, as in the following sentences:
One could not say that the problem truly solved anything; rather, what is meant is that the problem was solved without anyone's solving it.
Similarly, certain transitive verbs can take a subject referring to a person and an object referring to the same person or to one of his body parts, again with a passive sense.[4] Consider the verb break:
The two sentences are almost synonymous, but the explicit passive construction is less idiomatic.
Gerunds and nominalized verbs (nouns derived from verbs and referring to the actions or states expressed by them), unlike finite verbs, do not require explicit subjects. This allows an object to be expressed while omitting a subject. For example:
The same applies to infinitive constructions:
Many English educators and usage guides, such as The Elements of Style, discourage the use or overuse of the passive voice, seeing it as unnecessarily verbose, or as potentially unclear.[5] [6] However, the passive voice is frequently found in pedagogically valued writing, and its use in modern English continues as a meaningful mode of expression. In a sentence devoted to explaining why it should be avoided, The Elements of Style itself employs the passive voice[7], concretely showing the utility of this grammar feature, despite prescriptivist ideals.
No comments have been added.