Talk:English passive voice

message: Hi, can you please clarify if the headline sentence in passive? Or pseudopassive? I didn't find any good examples similar to this one. Apparently book cannot sell itself so it is sold and the correct usage would be - 2 million copies of the book were sold. But still it is widely used in this reverse order? What kind of grammar is that?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.132.179.152 (talk) 05:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's kind of covered in the article: see the section on the  middle voice. W. P. Uzer (talk) 07:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  See also this article's Misuse of the term section as I just edited it. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 17:27, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The book sold 2 million copies? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on English passive voice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081119072919/http://bartleby.com/68/5/6405.html to http://www.bartleby.com/68/5/6405.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:05, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on English passive voice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110608142511/http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/pdf/FPA_IPS_INSP_ISQU_MISR_ContentStyleSheet.pdf to http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/pdf/FPA_IPS_INSP_ISQU_MISR_ContentStyleSheet.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090416085755/http://158.130.17.5:80/~myl/languagelog/archives/003380.html to http://158.130.17.5/%7Emyl/languagelog/archives/003380.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:40, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi All,
Reference 4 doesn't actually seem to encourage the use of passive voice as suggested by the article.  It appears to allow an editor to require the use of passive voice, but it also allows an editor to require the use of active voice.Mgearmail (talk) 20:15, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: But the reference does support the point for which it is cited, which is that some publications' style sheets encourage the use of passive voice.  Admittedly, it isn't great support for that; it's just a template that a publication can use for this purpose.  Ideally we would want better support for this point.  John M Baker (talk) 20:42, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference 4 doesn't seem to encourage the use of passive voice 

message: A few lines should be added regarding the agents of double passive sentences --Backinstadiums (talk) 16:03, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Double passives agents 

message: The Distinction between passive voice and participial adjective section is rife with original research that contains an ipse dixit (e.g. "A distinction is made between [passive voice] and a superficially similar construction where a word with the form of a past participle is used as predicative adjective") and spurious analysis (e.g. "'I am excited' is not passive voice"). In omitting the operation of reflexivity (grammar), the given analysis creates a false dilemma between passive voice (i.e. entailing a past participle) and a past participle used as predicative adjective. For now, I'm just sayin.' I'm disinclined to fix the section by interpolating my own linguistic theory and terminology. Also, I'm loath to delete the section because it does contain some observations that might stimulate interest. I just hope unsuspecting readers avoid relying on this section as having been fully thought out, much less as linguistic gospel. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 13:58, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research 

message: Fowler reads 
 Ernest Gowers noted “In legal or quasi-legal language this construction may sometimes be useful and unexceptionable: Diplomatic privilege applies only to such things as are omitted to be done in the course of a person’s official duties. / Motion made: that the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question” (FMEU2 at 139). 
 
 But these are of a different kind from are sought to be included and are attempted to be refuted, which can be easily remedied by recasting.
--Backinstadiums (talk) 11:49, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verb "omit" 

message: The lede image strikes me as less than ideal. It entangles the generic passive construction with the specific "to be to" construction, and even though the latter is clearly in general usage, it can still be a bit tricky to pin down grammatically. So this introduces quite a complication right off the bat, and quite an unneeded one at that.
- 2A02:560:42D2:CE00:C024:ABB2:9DFA:B7EB (talk) 23:09, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Masks are to be worn" 

message: This article doesn't mention the passive voice construct as implicit in a so-called reduced relative clause, e.g., "The investigators never found the weapon (that was) used in the crime." I'd edit the article accordingly except I'm not a fan of the traditional terms used in the cites that are available to identify this phenomenon. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 16:12, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Omission from article 

message: This version (23 Sep '21) of the article has a single reference to page 66 of Wanner's Deconstructing the English Passive (and none to any other page(s) of that book, or to the book as a whole). 
:The single reference comes attached to the end of, and I quote:
::English allows a number of passive constructions which are not possible in many of the other languages with similar passive formation. These include promotion of an indirect object to subject (as in Tom was given a bag) and promotion of the complement of a preposition (as in Sue was operated on, leaving a stranded preposition).
In this respect, the article was, in autumn 2021, as it had been nine years earlier.
In the following edit (7 Dec '21), one-time editor "Drofnej" added a considerable amount of text, with 27 additional references to the same one page of Wanner's Deconstructing the English Passive.
I haven't been able to see a copy of that book, but am amazed by the amount of material that, "Drofnej" claimed, Wanner packed into a single page therein.
Later that day,  reverted Drofnej's edit, with the edit summary "Deleted this (largely) single-source essay (with possible WP:COI / WP:ADVOCACY issues) re Wanner, Anja".
Three days later,  reverted Kent Dominic's reversion, with the edit summary "text looks decent + should be easy to add more sources if really necessary + don't see basis of COI issue". (The reversion to Drofnej's version was precise.)
Botterweg, it should be easy to remove what I'd wildly guess are 27 bogus references to page 66 of Wanner's book. Any objection to my removal of them? Addition of references to genuine sources -- or anyway addition to those parts of this rather ramshackle article that are accurate and merit retention -- would indeed be necessary. You say this should be easy; would you care to make a start? -- Hoary (talk) 23:06, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: No objection! In fact, good catch! Unfortunately, de-ramshackling the section would take more time than I have at the moment, so I defer to your judgment here. Botterweg14 (talk) 02:05, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. Phase 1 now effected. , doing this delayed my lunch, and for me, that is serious. You could start at deramshackling this article. (To dip your toes in, try finding the string  within the article, and fixing that oddity.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:43, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I would share my lunch with you, but unfortunately that goes beyond my wikimarkup skills! Botterweg14 (talk) 04:34, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: The most remarkable page 66 of Anja Wanner's ''Deconstructing the English Passive''