Take heart, Karl--not all have forgotten. Here's a reference from an
Australian article referring to it as both 'middle voice' and 'ergative.'
http://www.adelaide.edu.au/english-for-uni/passive-voice/actives_passives_er
gatives_english_for_uni.pdf
I've skimmed through the article but need to run off to an appointment. It
should at least be food for thought.
Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karl Hagen
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 2:29 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ATEG Digest - 9 Mar 2015 to 10 Mar 2015 (#2015-19)
I would answer no, but then I subscribe to the notion that passive voice is
better understood as a clause type than as just a property of a verb, and
transformation between active and passive equivalents isn't a sufficient way
to understand the two. There are, for example, a few verbs that only occur
in the passive voice. (He is reputed to be a misogynist; It is rumored that
she will quit soon.)
As I pointed out in an earlier message, though, traditional grammar often
does assume that the passive voice is a property of the verb, and so would
only call transitive verbs active. The nineteenth century grammars that I've
looked at usually treat the voice of intransitives explicitly, by
introducing a term like "middle voice." In the twentieth century, that
distinction was dropped, as far as I can tell, but it wasn't replaced with
anything. In other words, later works in the traditional paradigm finesse
the issue by ignoring it.
> On Mar 11, 2015, at 10:57 AM, Seth Katz <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Karl (and others):
>
> Does labeling a verb as being in the active voice imply that it is
transitive, and therefore can be put in the passive voice?
> That is, you can't put a non-accusative verb in the passive voice (e.g.
"The plan landed"); so can such a verb be properly said to be in the active
voice?
> Or am I not understanding the notion of "voice" correctly?
>
> Seth Katz
>
> Dr. Seth Katz
> Associate Professor
> Associate Chair
> Department of English
> Bradley University
> Peoria, IL 61625
>
> Executive Director / Faculty Advisor
> Bradley University Hillel
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Karl Hagen <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> The stative/dynamic distinction is semantic (an expression of
aspectuality), and I take passive voice to be primarily a syntactic
construction.
>
> Although it's true that adjectival passives will always have a stative
> interpretation, and that ambiguities such as B typically turn on
> whether we understand the situation as stative or dynamic, it's also
> the case that some passive-voice constructions can be stative (e.g,
> "She is loved by everyone.")
>
> For your example, I take this to be an instance of a so-called
unaccusative verb, along the lines of:
>
> The pilot landed the plane. / The plane landed.
> The wind opened the door. / The door opened.
> The sun dried up the fields. / The fields dried up.
>
> So I take your example to be active voice. In other words, the mere fact
that the semantic role of the subject is something other than
agent/instrument isn't sufficient to call something passive.
>
> > On Mar 11, 2015, at 10:09 AM, Hancock, Craig G <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> >
> > Karl,
> > Where would "stative" fit in?
> > And how do we deal with something like "The fields dried up in the
sun?"
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karl Hagen
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 12:15 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: ATEG Digest - 9 Mar 2015 to 10 Mar 2015 (#2015-19)
> >
> > It depends on whether you regard voice to be a property of the verb or a
structural pattern of a clause. The former is the assumption, implicit or
otherwise, in most traditional grammar books. In the 19th century,
intransitive verbs were often said to be in the "middle" voice to account
for this gap. On the other hand, much work in modern linguistics takes the
second analysis to be more accurate. As a type of clause, there's no real
problem. You simply say that the active-voice pattern is the unmarked
default, and hence applies to anything that is not passive voice.
> >
> >
> >> On Mar 11, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Beth Young <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Interesting! Passive voice is something that only transitive verbs can
have, but I've never considered active voice to be limited to transitive
verbs. I've always considered all verbs that are conjugated with the formula
"Tense + Modal (have + -en) (be + -ing) Main Verb" to be active voice, and
verbs conjugated with the formula "Tense + Modal (have + -en) (be + -ing) +
be + -en + Main Verb" to be passive voice. Otherwise, wouldn't many verbs
have no voice at all? Maybe that doesn't matter.
> >>
> >> Hats off to any 8th grade teachers who wade into this question with
> >> their students. :)
> >>
> >> Beth
> >>
> >> Dr. Beth Rapp Young
> >> Associate Professor, English
> >> [log in to unmask]
> >>
> >> University of Central Florida
> >> "Reach for the Stars"
> >> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave
the list"
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
_____
This email has been scanned by WAU 3-Tier Anti-Virus/Anti-Spam System.
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|
