English passive voice
The passive voice in English is a grammatical "voice". The noun or noun phrase that would be the object of a corresponding active sentence (such as "Our troops defeated "the enemy"") appears as the subject of a sentence or clause in the passive voice (""The enemy" was defeated by our troops"). The subject of a sentence or clause featuring the passive voice typically denotes the recipient of the action (the patient) rather than the performer (the agent). Verbs in the passive voice in English are formed using several parts (periphrastically): the usual construction uses the auxiliary verbs  to be or "to get" together with the past participle of the main verb. For example, "Caesar was stabbed by Brutus" is in the passive voice. The subject, "Caesar", indicates the person acted upon. The agent is expressed here with the phrase "by Brutus", but this can be omitted. The equivalent sentence in the active voice is "Brutus stabbed Caesar", in which the subject denotes the doer, or agent, Brutus. A sentence featuring the passive voice is sometimes called a "passive sentence", and a verb phrase in passive voice is sometimes called a "passive verb". 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). Use of the passive in English varies with writing style and field. It is generally much less used than the active voice but is more prevalent in scientific writing than in other prose. Contemporary style guides discourage excessive use of the passive but appropriate use is generally accepted, for instance  where the patient is the topic, the agent is unimportant (and therefore omitted), or the agent is to be highlighted (and therefore placed toward the end). Identifying the English passive. The passive voice is a specific grammatical construction. The essential components, in English, are a form of the auxiliary verb "be" (or sometimes "get") and the past participle of the main verb denoting the action. The agent (the doer of the action) may be specified using a prepositional phrase with the preposition "by," but this is optional. It can be used in a number of different grammatical contexts; for instance , in declarative, interrogative, and imperative clauses, and in gerundial constructions: Distinction between passive voice and participial adjective. A distinction is made between the above type of clause and a superficially similar construction where a word with the form of a past participle is used as a predicative adjective, and the verb "be" or similar is simply a copula linking the subject of the sentence to that adjective. For example: is not passive voice, because "excited" here is not a verb form (as it would be in the passive "the electron was excited with a laser pulse"), but an adjective denoting  a state. See below. Misuse of the term. Though the passive "can" be used for the purpose of concealing the agent, this is not a valid way of identifying the passive, and many other grammatical constructions can be used to accomplish this. Not every expression that serves to take focus away from the performer of an action is an instance of passive voice. For instance, "There were mistakes" and "Mistakes occurred" are both in the active voice. Occasionally, authors express recommendations about use of the passive unclearly or misapply the term "passive voice" to include sentences of this type. An  example of this incorrect usage can be found in the following extract from an article from "The New Yorker" about Bernard Madoff (bolding and italics added; bold text indicates the verbs misidentified as passive voice): Two sentences later, Madoff said, "When I began the Ponzi scheme, I believed it would end shortly, and I would be able to extricate myself, and my clients, from the scheme." As he read this, he betrayed no sense of how absurd it was "to use the passive voice" in regard to his scheme, as if it were a spell of bad weather that had  descended on him . . . In most of the rest of the statement, one not only heard "the aggrieved passive voice", but felt the hand of a lawyer: "To the best of my recollection, my fraud began in the early nineteen-nineties." The intransitive verbs "would end" and "began" are in fact ergative verbs in the active voice. Although the speaker may be using words in a manner that diverts responsibility from him, this is not being accomplished by use of passive voice. Reasons for using the passive voice. The passive voice can be used without referring to the agent of an  action; it may therefore be used when the agent is unknown or unimportant, or the speaker does not wish to mention the agent. The last sentence illustrates a frequently criticized use of the passive, as the evasion of responsibility by failure to mention the agent (which may even be the speaker themselves). However the passive voice can also be used together with a mention of the agent, usually using a "by"-phrase. In this case the reason for use of the passive is often connected with the positioning of this phrase at the end of the clause (unlike in the active  voice, where the agent, as subject, normally precedes the verb). Here, in contrast to the examples above, passive constructions may in fact serve to place emphasis on the agent, since it is natural for information being emphasized to come at the end: In more technical terms, such uses can be expected in sentences where the agent is the focus ("comment", "rheme"), while the patient (the undergoer of the action) is the "topic" or "theme" (see Topic–comment). There is a tendency for sentences to be formulated so as to place the focus at the end, which can motivate the choice  of active or passive voice: Similarly, the passive may be used because the noun phrase denoting the agent is a long one (containing many modifiers) since it is convenient to place such phrases at the end of a clause: In some situations, the passive may be used so that the most dramatic word or the punchline appears at the end of the sentence. Style advice. Advice against the passive voice. Many language critics and language-usage manuals discourage use of the passive voice. This advice is not usually found in older guides, emerging only in the first half of the  twentieth century. In 1916, the British writer Arthur Quiller-Couch criticized this grammatical voice: Generally, use transitive verbs, that strike their object; and use them in the active voice, eschewing the stationary passive, with its little auxiliary "its’s" and "was’s", and its participles getting into the light of your adjectives, which should be few. For, as a rough law, by his use of the straight verb and by his economy of adjectives you can tell a man’s style, if it be masculine or neuter, writing or 'composition'. Two years later, in the original 1918 edition of "The  Elements of Style", Cornell University Professor of English William Strunk, Jr. warned against excessive use of the passive voice: The active voice is usually more direct and vigorous than the passive . . . This rule does not, of course, mean that the writer should entirely discard the passive voice, which is frequently convenient and sometimes necessary . . . The need to make a particular word the subject of the sentence will often . . . determine which voice is to be used. The habitual use of the active voice, however, makes for forcible writing. This is true not only in narrative concerned principally with action, but in  writing of any kind. Many a tame sentence of description or exposition can be made lively and emphatic by substituting a transitive in the active voice for some such perfunctory expression as "there is" or "could be heard". In 1926, in "A Dictionary of Modern English Usage", Henry Watson Fowler recommended against transforming active voice forms into passive voice forms, because doing so "...sometimes leads to bad grammar, false idiom, or clumsiness." In 1946, in the essay "Politics and the English Language", George Orwell recommended the active voice as an elementary principle of composition: "Never use the passive where you  can use the active." "The Columbia Guide to Standard American English" states that: "Active voice" makes subjects do something (to something); "passive voice" permits subjects to have something done to them (by someone or something). Some argue that "active voice" is more muscular, direct, and succinct, "passive voice" flabbier, more indirect, and wordier. If you want your words to seem impersonal, indirect, and noncommittal, "passive" is the choice, but otherwise, "active voice" is almost invariably likely to prove more effective. Use of the passive is more prevalent in scientific writing, but publishers of some scientific publications, such as Nature, Science  and the IEEE, explicitly encourage their authors to use active voice. The principal criticism against the passive voice is its potential for evasion of responsibility. This is because a passive clause may be used to omit the agent even where it is important: Krista Ratcliffe, a professor at Marquette University, notes the use of passives as an example of the role of grammar as "...a link between words and magical conjuring [...]: passive voice mystifies accountability by erasing who or what performs an action [...]." Advice by style guides and grammarians on appropriate use of the passive voice. Jan Freeman, a columnist  for "The Boston Globe", said that the passive voice does have its uses, and that "all good writers use the passive voice." Passive writing is not necessarily slack and indirect. Many famously vigorous passages use the passive voice, as in these examples with the passive verbs italicized: While Strunk and White, in "The Elements of Style", encourage use of the active voice, they also state that the passive is often useful and sometimes preferable, even necessary, the choice of active or passive depending, for instance, on the topic of the sentence. Another advisor, Joseph M. Williams, who has written several  books on style, states with greater clarity that the passive is often the better choice. According to Williams, the choice between active and passive depends on the answers to three questions: Bryan A. Garner, in "Garner's Modern English Usage", stresses the advantages of the active voice, but gives the following examples of where the passive is preferred: "Merriam–Webster's Dictionary of English Usage" recommends the passive voice when identifying the object (receiver) of the action is more important than the subject (agent), and when the agent is unknown, unimportant, or not worth mentioning: The linguist Geoffrey Pullum writes  that "The passive is not an undesirable feature limited to bad writing, it's a useful construction often needed for clear expression, and every good writer uses it." Despite criticism that the passive can be used to hide responsibility by omitting the agent, the passive can also be used to emphasize the agent. Writers have preferred placing the agent at the end of a clause or sentence to give it greater emphasis, as in the examples given in the previous section: Actual use of the passive voice. Agentless passives were once common in scientific writing, where the agent may be  irrelevant, although at least one publisher considers this a "fading practice": The passive voice is used more frequently in scientific writing than in other prose, where it is relatively rare. A statistical study of a variety of periodicals found a maximum incidence of 13 percent passive constructions. Despite Orwell's advice to avoid the passive, his "Politics and the English Language" employs passive voice for about 20 percent of its constructions. Passive constructions. Canonical passives. In the most commonly considered type of passive clause, a form of the verb "be" (or sometimes "get") is used as an auxiliary together with  the past participle of a transitive verb; that verb is missing its direct object, and the patient of the action (that which would be denoted by the direct object of the verb in an active clause) is denoted instead by the subject of the clause. For example, the active clause: contains "threw" as 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 (the agent ) can optionally be re-inserted using the preposition "by". The above example uses the verb "be" (in the past tense form "was") to make the passive. It is often possible to use the verb "get" as an alternative (possibly with slightly different meaning); for example, the active sentence "The ball hit Bob" may be recast in either of the following forms: The auxiliary verb of the passive voice ("be" or "get") may appear in any combination of tense, aspect and mood, and can also appear in non-finite form (infinitive, participle or gerund). See the article on English verb forms  for more information. Notice that this includes use of the verb "be" in progressive aspect, which does not normally occur when "be" is used as a simple copula. Some examples: Promotion of indirect objects. Unlike some other languages, English also allows passive clauses in which an indirect object, rather than a direct object, is promoted to the subject. 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 this respect, English resembles secundative languages.) It is normally only the first-appearing object that can be promoted; promotion of the indirect object takes place from a construction in which it precedes the direct object (i.e. where there is no "to" or "for" before the indirect object), whereas promotion of the direct object in such cases takes place from a construction in which the indirect object follows the direct object (this time being accompanied by "to" or "for"; see ). For example: Similar restrictions apply to the prepositional passive, as noted in the following section. Prepositional passive. It is  also possible, in some cases, to promote the object of a preposition. This may be called the prepositional passive, or sometimes the pseudopassive (although the latter term can also have other meanings, such as being equivalent to the impersonal passive voice, particularly in descriptions of other languages). In the passive form here, the preposition is "stranded"; that is, it is not followed by an object. The prepositional passive is common, especially in informal English. However some potential uses are much less acceptable than others; compare the following examples: The second sentence appears much less acceptable because sleeping above a bunk  does not change its state; the verb phrase "been slept above" does not express a "relevantly important property" of the bunk. It is not usually possible to promote a prepositional object if the verb also has a direct object; any passive rendering of the sentence must instead promote the direct object. For example: Exceptions occur with certain idiomatic combinations of verb+object+preposition, such as "take advantage of": Stative and adjectival uses. A type of clause that is similar or identical in form to the passive clauses described above has the past participle used to denote not an action, but a state  being the result of an action. For example, the sentence "The window was broken" may have two different meanings and might be ambiguous: The first sentence is an example of the canonical English passive as described above. However the second case is distinct; such sentences are not passive voice, because the participle is being used adjectivally; Such constructs are sometimes called "false passives" or "stative passives" (rarely called "statal", "static", or "resultative passives"), since they represent a state or result. By contrast the canonical passives, representing an action or event, may then be called "dynamic" or "eventive" passives. The ambiguity  in such sentences arises because the verb "be" is used in English both as the passive auxiliary and as the ordinary copular verb for linking to predicate adjectives. When "get" is used to form the passive, there is no ambiguity: "The window got broken" cannot have a stative meaning. (For ways in which some other languages make this distinction, see .) If a distinct adjective exists for the purpose of expressing the state, then the past participle is less likely to be used for that purpose; this is the case with the verb "open" and the adjective "open", so the  sentence "The door was opened" (but not "the package was unopened") more likely refers to the action than to the state since one can simply say "The door was open" in the stative case. Past participles of transitive verbs can also be used as adjectives (as in "a broken doll"), and the participles used in the above-mentioned "stative" constructions are often considered to be adjectival (in predicative use). Such constructions may then also be called "adjectival passives" (although they are not normally considered true passives). For example: Here, "relieved" is an ordinary adjective, though it derives from the past  participle of "relieve". In other sentences that same participle may be used to form the true (dynamic) passive: "He was relieved of duty." When the verb being put into the passive voice is a stative verb anyway, the distinctions between uses of the past participle become less clear, since the canonical passive already has a stative meaning. (For example: "People know his identity" → "His identity is known.") However it is sometimes possible to impart a dynamic meaning using "get" as the auxiliary, as in "get known" with the meaning "become known". Passive constructions without an exactly corresponding active. Some  passive constructions are not derived exactly from a corresponding active construction in the ways described above. This is particularly the case with sentences containing content clauses (usually "that"-clauses). Given a sentence in which the role of direct object is played by such a clause, for example It is possible to convert this to a passive by promoting the content clause to subject; in this case, however, the clause typically does not change its position in the sentence, and an expletive "it" takes the normal subject position: Another way of forming passives in such cases involves promoting the subject of the  content clause to the subject of the main clause, and converting the content clause into a non-finite clause with the "to"-infinitive. This infinitive is marked for grammatical aspect to correspond to the aspect (or past tense) expressed in the content clause. For example: Some verbs are used almost exclusively in the passive voice. This is the case with "rumor", for example. The following passive sentences are possible: but it is not possible to use the active counterpart *"They rumored that he was a war veteran." (This was once possible, but has fallen out of use.) Another situation in which  the passive uses a different construction than the active involves the verb "make", meaning "compel". When this verb is used in the active voice it takes the bare infinitive (without the particle "to"), but in the passive voice it takes the "to"-infinitive. For example: Double passives. The construction called double passive can arise when one verb appears in the "to"-infinitive as the complement of another verb. If the first verb takes a direct object ahead of the infinitive complement (this applies to raising-to-object verbs, where the expected subject of the second verb is raised to the position of  object of the first verb), then the passive voice may be used independently for either or both of the verbs: Other verbs which can behave similarly to "expect" in such constructions include "order", "tell", "persuade", etc., leading to such double passives as "The man was ordered to be shot" and "I was persuaded to be ordained". Similar constructions sometimes occur, however, when the first verb is raising-to-subject rather than raising-to-object – that is, when there is no object before the infinitive complement. For example, with "attempt", the active voice construction is simply "We attempted to complete the  project". A double passive formed from that sentence would be: with both verbs changed simultaneously to the passive voice, even though the first verb takes no object – it is not possible to say "*We attempted the project to be completed", which is the sentence from which the double passive would appear to derive. This latter double passive construction is criticized as questionable both grammatically and stylistically. Fowler calls it "clumsy and incorrect", suggesting that it springs from false analogy with the former (acceptable) type of double passive, though conceding its usefulness in some legal and quasi-legal language. Other verbs  mentioned (besides "attempt") with which the construction is found include "begin", "desire", "hope", "propose", "seek" and "threaten". Similarly, "The American Heritage Book of English Usage" declares this construction unacceptable. It nonetheless occurs in practice in a variety of contexts. Additional passive constructions. Certain other constructions are sometimes classed as passives. The following types are mentioned by Pullum. A "bare passive clause" is similar to a typical passive clause, but without the passive auxiliary verb (so it is a non-finite clause consisting of a subject together with a verb phrase based on a past participle with the passive construction). These  can be used in such contexts as newspaper headlines: and as modifiers (adverbial phrases), i.e. nominative absolutes: Other constructions are mentioned in which a passive past participle clause is used, even though it is not introduced by the auxiliary "be" or "get" (or is introduced by "get" with a direct object): In the "concealed passive", the present participle or gerund form ("-ing" form) appears rather than the past participle. This can appear after "need", and for some speakers after "want" (with similar meaning). For example: (An idiomatic expression with the same construction is "... doesn't bear thinking about".) The concealed  passive (with an "-ing" form) can also be used in a complex construction; Huddleston gives the following example: See also . Syntactic Components of the Passive Voice. The syntax of the passive voice has been studied by linguists to find what specifically differentiates the passive voice from active past tense, as well as the passive middle, and other past tense formations. Through these studies, linguists have attempted to identify the key components of what makes up the passive voice construction. The sections below discuss some generalizations that have been found and discussed regarding the passive voice in English following Chomsky’s  generative grammar. The Passive participle. In English, the passive requires the use of the past participle of a verb, generally with an auxiliary verb "be." The passive uses an auxiliary "be" in order to get tense because participles are non finite. The participle verb is also unable to assign Case. Case is a tool used in transformational grammar that states that Case gives grammatical relations to a noun to show how it functions in the sentence; for example, if a noun needs to be in first or second person due to the form of the  verb. So, if a noun  phrase in the passive needs to get Case from the participle verb, it must undergo movement to the head of the sentence CP to receive nominative Case.ii Wanner argues that identification of the passive voice construction can’t solely rely on the auxiliary "be" and the past participle as distinguishing features because the auxiliary "be" is present progressive verbs and the past participle can be found in multiple constructions that are not passive voice constructions. In these instances Wanner refers to, the auxiliary "be" is not found next to or with the past participle. If the auxiliary "be" is present  directly in front of a past participle, it is a passive construction. External argument, Implicit Argument & Theta Roles. Passives always contain an external argument. An external argument is specifically referring to the theta role that is assigned to the subject of the sentence. Often, the external argument is the agent of the sentence. In passive constructions, the external argument does not need to be in subject position, as seen in active constructions. It is often found in an adjunct position instead. The passive voice also doesn’t have to use the agent role. The passive allows for a variety of  thematic roles in the external argument. For example, the subject could have a theta role of goal instead, as in the sentence below.            I was sent a letter by them. In the passive, external arguments can be made explicit in adjunct positions with the use of a "by" phrase. They don’t have to be put into argument positions in order to be specific. The external argument in the passive will be represented even without a "by" phrase. When a "by" phrase is missing in the passive, the external argument of the verb can become an implicit argument. Implicit here  refers to the fact that these arguments can be implied and are not required to be explicit when used in a passive construction. Control and Arguments. Explicit arguments can control a PRO subject within an adjunct purpose clause using thematic control. PRO can also be controlled by an internal or external argument. Specifically, explicit and implicit arguments can control PRO in purpose clauses:            They sold the books [PRO to make profit]. Above,  "they" is the controller for PRO, and PRO is referencing that "they" are the ones who did it to make the profit. In this case, the explicit argument  of the sentence is "they." In the passive, arguments can even control a PRO subject without having an explicit external argument, because it is still there "implicitly."            The books were sold IMP [ PRO to make money]. Above, IMP is the reference to PRO because the books didn’t sell themselves to make money, someone, who the interpreter of the sentence knows exists implicitly, sold them. In the passive, PRO is still able to be controlled even without having an explicit argument. Control abilities can also be limited with implicit arguments in the passive. An implicit subject "cannot" control PRO  in the case of ditransitive and subject control verbs. This is relates back to passive movement. Due to the raising done to get nominative case, the head T is no longer in an Agree relationship with the implicit subject, which means that the implicit subject can no longer control PRO either.            *Sarah was promised (by Greg) [PRO to go on a vacation.] In the passive, the thematic object can be the controller because it is still connected in agreement. Sarah was persuaded [PRO to go on vacation]. Some suggest that the ability to control is due to implicit arguments controlling  through a thematic control, rather than an argument control like full arguments. By Phrases in the Passive. Another feature of the passive is the optional by phrase. The by phrase is where the external argument can be explicitly expressed. This by phrase acts as an adjunct to the verb and is assigned  theta roles that would normally be assigned  elsewhere in the sentence, specifically it takes the theta role of the active subject. Toni ate the last piece of baklava. (active) The last piece of baklava was eaten [by Toni]. (passive) In the passive, the theta role of agent is  being given to Toni in the by phrase, the same as it previously had in the active subject. These by phrases are attached to the VoiceP head and are special to passives. When we see by phrases in other sentences, they are being used differently: either to identify a location (locatives) or to describe how something is being done (instrumentals).            Toni and Ron live by the airport. (locative)            She will make the quilt by hand. (instrumental) Movement in the Passive. In Chomsky’s generative grammar, the following example of a passive with the auxiliary "be" and a "by" phrase, gives  the same reading as in an active sentence.                                    Zenobia idolized Caesar. (active)                                    Caesar was idolized by Zenobia. (passive) ‘"Caesar’" which acted as the direct object in the active form, as the internal argument, moves from the direct object of the verb into the subject position in the passive for two reasons. The first reason is to satisfy the EPP (extended projection principle) and then second is to get Case, since in its participle form, the verb cannot give Case to ‘"Zenobia’". ‘"Zenobia’" receives nominative Case from the finite INFL, the head of the CP. Movement does not always take  place in the passive though we see it often with by-phrases. This is because movement only takes place when a NP depends on the verb to get Case. There are instances of the passive that do not use movement. Non-Passivized Verbs. Not all verbs in English can be passivized. Unaccusative verbs do not form a passive in English. <nowiki>*</nowiki>It was wilted quickly. In the passive the external argument is suppressed, but in unaccusative verbs, there is no external argument to be suppressed. Instead their subject argument generally acts as the object and then moves to  the subject position to get Case. In the example above, you can see that the subject "it" moved from the object position to the subject. This is demonstrated in the trace below, where the trace (t) is left behind when the word "it" moves to the front of the sentence into subject position where it receives case. [ was wilted quickly[ it . It [ was wilted quickly[ t . English also does not have impersonal passives, even though this can be found in other languages, like Dutch or German. One argument using the lens of cognitive grammar claims that this is due to  how auxiliary "be" functions in the passive. ii With the auxiliary "be", the passive needs to have a patient argument. Unergative verbs that would form an impersonal passive do not have a patient argument, so the passive can’t be formed. In Dutch, the "be" verb functions differently, so that the agent is always present. Therefore, in Dutch, the passive doesn’t require a patient argument. Another view is that it has to do with Case. Specifically, the inability of intransitive verbs to assign Case. Since intransitive verbs do not have objects, they don’t assign Case. If the verb  can’t assign Case, then Case cannot be obtained by the passive; so they can’t be passivized. This view claims that in German and Dutch, the verbs are structural case assigners which is why they are able to passivized in those languages. Another Case-related argument varies slightly, still agreeing that no passive can be formed since the verb has no object, meaning no case can be assigned. However, the difference in this argument is in the analysis of how the impersonal passive works in Dutch and German. In this Case-related argument, Roberts (1985) claims that German  and Dutch use dative case, argued to be an inherent Case (this is from Chomsky’s generative grammar and means that specific verbs assign specific arguments and theta-roles) on their verbs, meaning these verbs can be put in the passive. The reasons certain verbs cannot be passivized is not just based on syntax; there are semantic reasons behind their inability to passivize as well. Get Passive in English. Originally the "get" passive was viewed as another variation of the "be" passive in English. It was assumed to function the exact same as the "be" passive, just using the  verb "get" in place of auxiliary "be". Today this is a topic of discussion among linguists who have noted that there are key differences between the behavior of a "be" passive and a "get" passive. Control & Agent Behavior in Get Passives. Some claim that the "get" passive is considered a subject control verb, a construction where the unstated subject is forced to refer back to the subject of the main clause by the verb.            [Elle got PRO hired t] Above, PRO has to refer to Elle, making it a subject control verb. The "be" passive does not allow for subject  control. The patient in the "get" passive is often seen as being to blame for the event or action occurring, more so than in the "be" passive. The "get" passive patient seems to take on more responsibility in relation to the event of the sentence.            Mary got arrested.            Mary was arrested. In the "get" passive version, there is some implied amount of accountability for being arrested, as if Mary did something to cause her being arrested, making it more closely related to the event of being arrested, compared to the stative "be" passive which doesn’t connect back to the  event, but is stative. This is because in "get" passives there is a belief that the surface subject can be identified as a secondary agent, but this is not an available reading in the be passive. Arguments as an Adjectival Passive. Some linguists argue that the "get" passive is actually an adjectival passive, making it not a true passive and different from be. Evidence for the get passive as an adjectival passive comes from examples where get passives are not allowed to appear and do not behave as a be passive, which are demonstrated below: Agent-Oriented Manner Adverbials            *The  book got torn on purpose. Rationale Clauses            *The ship got sunk [PRO/ec) to collect the insurance money]. Predication Structures            *The food (finally) got served [(PRO/ec) kneeling]. Reflexive Pronouns            *Food should never get served only for oneself. However, there are instances where the above examples have a "get" passive that is allowed in the types of constructions above, and a "be" passive that is not. Furthermore, "get" passives allow the use of the by-phrase in the same conditions as the "be" passive.            The criminal got arrested by Mary. This is something that usually isn’t seen with true  adjectival passives. These notions put the idea that the "get" passive may be an adjectival passive under question. Middle voice and passival. The term "middle voice" is sometimes used to refer to verbs used without a passive construction, but in a meaning where the grammatical subject is understood as undergoing the action. The meaning may be reflexive: but is not always: Such verbs may also be called "passival". Another construction sometimes referred to as "passival" involves a wider class of verbs, and was used in English until the nineteenth century. Sentences having this construction feature progressive aspect and resemble the  active voice, but with meaning like the passive. Examples of this would be: A rare example of the passival form being used in modern English is with the following phrase: This passival construction was displaced during the late 18th and early 19th century by the progressive passive (the form "is being built" as given above). The grammaticality of the progressive passive, called by some the "imperfect passive," was controversial among grammarians in the 19th century, but is accepted without question today. It has been suggested that the passive progressive appeared just to the east of Bristol and was popularized by  the Romantic poets.