passive voice = “to be” + past participle "To be" = is, are, am , was, were, has been, have been, had been, will be, will have been, being
Passive voice is generally frowned upon in favor of active voice, but are there circumstances in which passive voice is acceptable or even preferred? Any good examples in literature?
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
Several points that help to appreciate passive voice include that passive voice verbs can be simple or participle. Participles serve both verb function and adjective function for the same use. Simple verbs modify, so to speak, a verb's action doer. Participles modify a noun, pronoun, or noun phrase in object position. Participles force intransitive verbs to take an object the verb modifies, in other words, transform into transitive verbs.
The predicate of a passive voice expression can be past, present, perfect, or future tense, too. Plus, an implied object of an implied preposition, though left out, is always a solid test for passive voice that on its surface may seem active voice.
In addition to to be auxiliary verbs, passive voice also uses to have and to get state-of-being case auxiliary verbs. Plus a few other rare cases where an auxiliary verb is unnecessary.
Examples
Participle verb, modifies a noun phrase, usually in object position
Active voice Manny had broken the door lock. Perfect past participle Opal has stopped the flood. Perfect present participle She decorated the sofa. Past participle Whiskers jumps garden moles. Present participle Gary will have started a fire. Future perfect participle
Passive voice to have and to get auxiliary and main verb examples. To beat happens to be more flexible than many main verbs for passive voice illustration purposes.
He gets beat [by someone (by, preposition; someone, object though true subject)]. He got beaten. He gets beat by the bully. He got beaten for a week.
She has a beating. She has gotten a beating. She will have to get a beating.
"Beating" above is the gerund case, present participle verb used as a noun.
One of a rare different passive voice verb types here
He took a beat-down from the same lunk. (from, preposition)
Passive voice serves many functions for whatever type of composition, formal and informal, prose: for emphasis, when a verb's actor is unknown or unimportant, when impersonal expression is indicated or required, when an acted-upon object needs to be in subject position -- to keep in touch with a viewpoint persona -- to show a grammar challenged speaker's dialogue and thus characterize the persona, to promote a sentence object, to demote a sentence subject, to express an indefinite time span, event, setting, or persona, need to use a particular noun or pronoun, verbal, adverbial, prepositional, noun, adjective, or adjectival phrase in sentence subject position and other than a true sentence subject.
A general principle of thumb for passive voice's artful use, overall, is demotion of true sentence subjects and promotion of true sentence objects. Otherwise, passive voice can break the monotony of active voice's forcefulness, or forcible expression, or substitute for overly forced active voice, or entail variety.
Likewise, a principle of thumb, is to use passive voice sparingly, for variety's sake, for example, no more than one sentence per ten sentences, and the other sentences also of varied syntax: simple, complex, compound, complex-compound, loose, and periodic. Most any published page will contain at least one passive voice sentence. Reading to locate and evaluate passive voice is a powerful learning tool.
I am astonished that grammar handbooks' sections on voice often contain passive voice uses other than the demonstration examples. Maybe the point is that passive voice has its uses and that's dissimulation to emphasize the point and express passive voice is okay if timely and judiciously used. More though subtle demonstration, in other words. Amusing.
[ June 05, 2016, 12:16 AM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
I try to pick out and revise the passive verbs, the idea being to make what I'm writing more immediate---or at least that's the theory, I'm not that sure it works...
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
quote:Originally posted by dmsimone: passive voice = “to be” + past participle "To be" = is, are, am , was, were, has been, have been, had been, will be, will have been, being
Passive voice is generally frowned upon in favor of active voice, but are there circumstances in which passive voice is acceptable or even preferred? Any good examples in literature?
Sorry, but this is incorrect.
Passive voice is NOT "to be" verbs.
Passive voice is a distinct term that applies to sentence structure NOT to the kind of verb in the sentence.
Passive voice is when the sentence elements (subject-verb-object) are rearranged in such a way that the emphasis in the sentence is on the object (because it comes first).
"A spider bit the man." (Active)
"The man was bitten by a spider." (Passive)
Passive voice can emphasize the object to the point that the subject of the sentence is completely eliminated. This is helpful in sentences where no one wants to take responsibility for the action:
"Mistakes were made."
This is also used in cases where the actor is not important:
"The rat was tested by being placed in several different types of mazes."
So, once again (do a search in this forum on "passive voice" and you will find topic after topic after topic explaining what it actually is), passive voice is NOT the use of the "to be" verbs.
Now, so that you can have a term to apply to the use of "to be" verbs, may I offer "static" voice? And the opposite of "static" voice is not "active voice" (that's the opposite of "passive voice"). The opposite of "static" voice is "dynamic" voice (when you use more dynamic verbs than "to be" -- also known as "state of being" -- verbs).
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
Matter of distance. Somehow I got it into my head that saying "bit" was more immediate to the reader than saying "was bitten."
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
Well, if the sentence says "X bit" then that's a different thing from when the sentence says "X was bitten" (a difference between perpetrator and victim).
Posted by dmsimone (Member # 10502) on :
Yikes! I was way off with my simplistic definition! I'll search and review the forum archives.
Must...study...
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
This too soon becomes second nature from study and practice.
For me, as I've noted before, it took time and passion to master grammatical voice and the many nuances of the several voices and has been more than worth the midnight candles burnt.
Voice also led me into a comprehensive grammar study that had to exceed the material available from grammar handbooks -- too many exceptions that grammar handbooks cannot cover. In terms of personal growth and writer growth, a sublime epiphany arose: the decisions are mine to make and own. The attendant attachment of that is only that the intent is communicated, readable, and comprehensible. Meeting that expectation has also consumed time and effort. I learned more of what doesn't work than what does work.
Pardon my admission here that I've also learned to be artfully obtuse and do when or if I decide that is indicated, usually for audience target reasons, some of a personal nature.
The concept is labeled the Socratic method, dissimulation techniques enumerated by rhetorician Connop Thirlwall. The rhetoric field has been the saving grace for managing the mischiefs of grammar principle exceptions and, of course, managing that artful prose is mischievous in its exceptions to otherwise than rigid creative composition principles. Not laws or rules, more guidelines, really.
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
dmsimone, we understand that people who haven't been here all along may not be aware of some of the discussion that has gone before, so we try to be patient when we explain things all over again.
This forum has been in action for quite a number of years now, and many such topics have been discussed more than once.
It wouldn't hurt, when you have a question about a particular writing topic or method to do a search first to see if your question has already been answered.
And, anyone can resurrect a topic at any time by posting a new comment in it. So even if you exact version of the question isn't answered, you can ask it in an old topic and bring what has been said to the fore again.
Posted by Pyre Dynasty (Member # 1947) on :
Also look up Transitive/Intransitive verbs.
With anything in writing there isn't so much "right and wrong" as there are consequences. There are consequences to using passive/active and you just have to choose which has the consequences you want.
I think there is value in revisiting topics that have been discussed before. I know I've posted things here that I disagree with now. Plus I think it helps those of us who have answered these questions to refine our answers. It reminds me of a story about Einstein. He showed one of his grad-students the test he was going to give that was identical to the one gave a year before. When confronted about this Einstein told him it was okay because the answers had changed.
[ June 08, 2016, 01:46 PM: Message edited by: Pyre Dynasty ]
Posted by Sara Luikert (Member # 10487) on :
In word you have the option of changing the settings so that word picks up all the passive sentences. I have found this really helpful, but I am not sure it catches everything.
Also I found 'Hemingway App' online, seems to cover some cool writing tips like convoluted sentences and passive voice.
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
You change the settings how? By looking for the word "by"? (One way to catch some passive sentences, but not all passive sentences use that word.)
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
Word's "Style" check settings include 21 options; "Passive [voice] sentences" is the eighth of the list. The passive voice algorithm alerts to state of being auxiliary verb and transitive main verb predicate phrases. The algorithm also determines if a main verb is subjective or objective case. Subjective case verbs modify, so to speak, a true sentence subject. Objective case verbs modify a true sentence object. Why word processor grammar checkers can alert to passive voice.
Examples, active voice. Subjective case, intransitive verb:
Marty brought cake fixings. (Marty is the bringer, is changed.)
Subjective case, transitive verb:
Marty traveled by taxi. (Marty is the traveler, is changed.)
Marty decorated cakes with frosting. (The action decorates cakes, changes them.)
Passive voice, all objective case, transitive verb predicates, true sentence object in sentence subject position and true sentence subject in sentence object position.
Cake fixings were brought by Marty.
A taxi was used for Marty's travel.
Butter cream frosting will be blended in Marty's kitchen.
Marty's cakes have been decorated with buttercream frosting.
This subjective-objective verb case consideration is probably the last to be learned yet more crucial aspect of passive voice mastery. For me, it was the final piece of a complex grammatical voice study.
And no, Word does not alert to rare passive voice exceptions; like, Marty took a beat-down -- from Killian.
[ June 11, 2016, 06:46 PM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
Interesting. It can be helpful, but most helpful is for the writer to actually know what passive voice is and how to make the best use of it - as with all grammatical tools, of course.
Posted by Pyre Dynasty (Member # 1947) on :
The more you give the robot the more the robot takes.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)