UNIVERSITY GOCE DELCHEV SHTIP FACULTY FOR _________________

SEMINAR PAPER: __________________________

Mentor: ________

Candidate: _____________

Skopje, May, 2013

CONTENT:

1. MODAL VERBS IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE REFERRING TO THE PRESENT AND PAST:FORM, MEANING AND USAGE---------------------------3 2. PAST TENSES: FORMS, MEANINGS AND USAGE--------------------------------8 3. THE PASSIVE--------------------------------------------------------------------------------17 4. USAGE OF THE PASSIVE----------------------------------------------------------------18 5. CAUSATIVE FORM OF HAVE-----------------------------------------------------------24 REFFERENCESS---------------------------------------------------------------------------25

1. MODAL VERBS IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE REFERRING TO THE PRESENT AND PAST:FORM, MEANING AND USAGE

The modal verbs of English are a small class of auxiliary verbs used mostly to express modality (properties such as possibility, obligation, etc.). They can be distinguished from other verbs by their defectiveness (they do not

have participle or infinitive forms) and by the fact that they do not take the ending (e)s in the third-person singular. The principal English modal verbs are can, could, may, might, must, shall, should, will and would. Certain other verbs are sometimes, but not always, classed as modals; these include ought, had better, and (in certain uses) dare and need. Verbs which share some but not all of the characteristics of the principal modals are sometimes called "semimodals". The verbs customarily classed as modals in English have the following properties:

They do not inflect, except insofar as some of them come in presentpast (presentpreterite) pairs. They do not add the ending -(e)s in the third-person singular (the present-tense modals therefore follow the preterite-

present paradigm).

They are defective: they are not used as infinitives or participles (except occasionally in non-standard English; see Double modals below), nor

as imperatives, nor (in the standard way) assubjunctives.

They function as auxiliary verbs: they modify the meaning of another verb, which they govern. This verb generally appears as a bare infinitive, although in some definitions a modal verb can also govern the to-infinitive (as in the case of ought).

They have the syntactic properties associated with auxiliary verbs in English, principally that they can undergo subjectauxiliary inversion (in questions, for example) and can be negated by the appending of not after the verb. The following verbs have all of the above properties, and can be classed as the

principal modal verbs of English. They are listed here in presentpreterite pairs where applicable:

can and could may and might shall and should will and would must (no preterite; see etymology below) Note that the preterite forms are not necessarily used to refer to past time,

and in some cases they are near synonyms to the present forms. Note that most of these so-called preterite forms are most often used in the subjunctive mood in the present tense. The auxiliary verbs may and let are also used often in the subjunctive mood. Famous examples of these are "May The Force be with you," and "Let God bless you with good." These are both sentences that express some uncertainty, hence they are subjunctive sentences. The verbs listed below mostly share the above features, but with certain differences. They are sometimes, but not always, categorized as modal verbs.[1] They may also be called "semimodals".

The verb ought differs from the principal modals only in that it governs a toinfinitive rather than a bare infinitive (compare he should go with he ought to go).

The verbs dare and need can be used as modals, often in the negative (Dare he fight?; You dare not do that.; You need not go.), although they are more commonly found in constructions where they appear as ordinary inflected verbs (He dares to fight; You don't need to go). There is also a dialect verb, nearly obsolete but sometimes heard in Appalachia and the Deep South of the United States: darest, which means "dare not", as in "You darest do that."

The verb had in the expression had better behaves like a modal verb, hence had better (considered as a compound verb) is sometimes classed as a modal or semimodal.

The verb used in the expression used to (do something) can behave as a modal, but is more often used with do-support than with auxiliary-verb syntax: Did she use to do it? and She didn't use to do it are more common than Used she to do it? and She used not (usedn't) to do it.

Other English auxiliaries appear in a variety of inflected forms and are not regarded as modal verbs. These are:

be, used as an auxiliary in passive voice and continuous aspect constructions; it follows auxiliary-verb syntax even when used as a copula, and in auxiliary-like formations such as be going to, is to and be about to;

have, used as an auxiliary in perfect aspect constructions, including the idiom have got (to); it is also used in have to, which has modal meaning, but here (as when denoting possession)have only rarely follows auxiliary-verb syntax (see also must below);

do; see do-support. The modals can and could are from Old English can(n) and cu, which were

respectively present and preterite forms of the verb cunnan ("to be able"), The silent l in the spelling of could results from Old from analogy with would and should. respectively

Similarly, may and might are

English mg and meahte,

present and preterite forms of magan ("may, to be able"); shall and should are from sceal and sceolde, respectively present and preterite forms of sculan ("to owe, be obliged"); and will and would are from wille and wolde, respectively present and preterite forms of willan ("to wish, want"). The aforementioned Old English verbs cunnan, magan, sculan and willan

followed the preterite-present paradigm (or in the case of willan, a similar but irregular paradigm), which explains the absence of the ending -s in the third person on the present forms can, may, shall and will. (The original Old English forms given above were first and third person singular forms; their descendant forms became generalized to all persons and numbers.) The verb must comes from Old English moste, part of the verb motan ("to be able to, be obliged to"). This was another preterite-present verb, of which moste was in fact the preterite (the present form mot gave rise to mote, which was used as a modal verb in Early Modern English; but must has now lost its past connotations and has replaced mote). Similarly, ought was originally a past form it derives from ahte, preterite of agan ("to own"), another Old English preterite-present verb, whose present tense form ah has given the modern (regular) verb owe (and ought was formerly used as a past tense of owe).
5

The verb dare also originates from a preterite-present verb, durran ("to dare"), specifically its present tense dear(r), although in its non-modal uses in Modern English it is conjugated regularly. However need comes from the regular Old English verb neodian (meaning "to be necessary") the alternative third person form need (in place of needs), which has become the norm in modal uses, became common in the 16th century. The preterite (past) forms given above (could, might, should and, would, corresponding to can, may, shall and will respectively) do not always simply modify the meaning of the modal to give it past time reference. The only one regularly used as an ordinary past tense is could, when referring to ability: I could swim may serve as a past form of I can swim.

All the preterites are used as past equivalents for the corresponding present modals in indirect speech and similar clauses requiring the rules of sequence of tenses to be applied. For example, in 1960 it might have been said that People think that we will all be driving hovercars by the year 2000, whereas at a later date it might be reported that In 1960,

people thought we would all be driving hovercars by the year 2000.

This "future-in-the-past" usage of would can also occur in independent sentences: I moved to Green Gables in 1930; I would live there for the next ten years.

Conditional sentences

The

preterite

forms

of in

modals

are

used

in counterfactual The

conditional sentences,

the apodosis (then-clause).

modal would (sometimes should as a first-person alternative) is used to produce the conditional construction which is typically used in clauses of this type: If you loved me, you would support me. It can be replaced

by could (meaning "would be able to") and might (meaning "would possibly") as appropriate.

When the clause has past time reference, the construction with the modal plus perfect infinitive (see above) is used: If they (had) wanted to do it,

they would

(could/might)

have

done it

by

now.(The would

have

done construction is called the conditional perfect.) The protasis (if-clause) of such a sentence typically contains the past tense of a verb (or the past perfect construction, in the case of past time reference), without any modal. The modal couldmay be used here in its role as the past tense of can (if I could speak French). However all the modal preterites can be used in such clauses with certain types of hypothetical future reference: if I should lose or should I lose (equivalent to if I lose); if you would/might/could stop doing that (usually used as a form of request).

Sentences with the verb wish (and expressions of wish using if only...) follow similar patterns to the if-clauses referred to above, when they have counterfactual present or past reference. When they express a desired event in the near future, the modal would is used: I wish you would visit me; If only he would give me a sign.

For

more

information

see English

conditional

sentences and English

subjunctive.

2. PAST TENSES: FORMS, MEANINGS AND USAGE

These notes cover the following tenses in English grammar: Form The regular form is verb +ed although of course there are many irregular verbs in English; for example,think/thought; come/came; drive/drove; spin/spun; write/wrote. We need to introduce the auxiliary verb did into Past Simple negative sentences and questions, so he arrivedbecomes he did not arrive and did he arrive? Past Simple I you we they he she it There is one exception to this - the verb be. The following chart shows the positive and negative forms of this verb in the past. Unlike all other Past Simple verbs, questions are made simply by inverting the subject and the was/were, e.g. she was late becomes was she late? did not (didn't) look looked Past simple Present Perfect Tenses Past Continuous Past Perfect Simple Past Simple

Past Simple of be I he she it you were we were not (weren't) they Meanings The Past Simple is one of the tenses that we use to talk about events, states or actions that have been completed at some point in the past. To emphasise this completion at a time before the present we often add expressions such as in 1980, in the last century, many years ago, yesterday, when I was younger, but these expressions are not of course obligatory. The Past Simple is also preferred when we want to give more precise detail concerning an event. This is something that we often hear in news broadcasts where the speaker begins by using the Present Perfect to indicate that the event happened very recently and then switch to the Past Simple to give a more detailed account of the event. For example: The north coast of France has been swept by violent storms. Trees were uprooted, houses were damaged and cars were blown off the roads. There was, however, no loss of life. This demonstrates quite clearly the main use of the Past Simple as a tense of narration which is used to move a story forward and to pinpoint its main events and action. The other past tenses are normally reserved for setting the scene or giving background information against which the Past Simple highlights the more important elements of the narrative. Here's an example which should illustrate the point: was was not (wasn't)

I'd been out shopping all day and it had just started snowing quite heavily when I decided to head back home. By the time I'd got to the car it was snowing even faster. I got in and set off along the High Street. I was driving really carefully, but suddenly some idiot pulled out in front of me. I braked hard. But there was no way I could've missed him. I ran straight into the side of his car. The guy jumped out and started shouting at me. The Past Perfect tenses and Past Continuous are used merely as a backdrop to the more exciting action which is in the Past Simple. However, you need to note that this tense is not only used for single, momentary actions like those in the story above. It is also used to describe events that occurred over longer periods of time and actions which were repeated over an extended period, but are now ended. So,

During the 1930s he made several attempts to climb Everest. (repeated) Our family lived in this house for over 30 years. (extended period) That's the boy that hit me! (single action, but compare with...) The old man hit the horse until it collapsed (clearly repeated action) As we move on to the next past tense, you will need to keep in mind the fact that the Past Simple refers only to actions, states and events that were wholly completed at some time in the past. This is important as we will be examining the differences between this tense and the Present Perfect tenses in the next section. Present Perfect Tenses We have already met the Present Perfect Simple and Present Perfect Continuous during our discussion of the tenses that we can use to talk about the present. We noted that these tenses are used to refer to actions which began in the past and are still true now and that time expressions with for and since often accompany them.

I have lived here for 25 years. I have been working in this factory since I was a boy.

Meanings Let's begin with the Present Perfect Simple. When referring to the past, we use this tense to talk about completed events, actions and states in the past which
10

occurred during a time period which is not yet finished. Often we use time expressions to indicate the time period we are interested in has not yet finished. This sounds rather complicated so let's look at a couple of examples.

I've had four cups of coffee today. Anne's been off work three times this year already. I've read two books this week. In each example the implication is that today, this year and this week have not yet finished and that there is still time for these events to happen again. Sometimes there is no time expression, but it is implied:

I've never been to Australia. (the listener will understand that the speaker's life is the implied time period)

Note the difference between these two sentences. I have never met my uncle (Present Perfect) I never met my uncle (Past Simple) Both sentences indicate that a meeting between my uncle and myself has not happened at any time in the past. However, because the Present Perfect refers to an unfinished time period, most native speakers of English would say that there is still a possibility for me to meet my uncle. In contrast to this, the second sentence indicates that, for example, a meeting is now out of the question because my uncle died before I had a chance to meet him. ` You will find grammar books and English teaching course books that give

short lists of words and expressions that are used with one tense or the other, but these should really only be treated as rule-of-thumb approximations since you may find that these rules are often broken by native speakers of English. Both the Present Perfect Simple and Present Perfect Continuous are used to refer to completed events, but there are often subtle differences that we need to be aware of:

I've painted the lounge. I've been painting the lounge. We understand that the actions in both of the sentences have stopped, but in the first example we know that the painting itself has finished, whereas in the second, the lounge may not yet be ready. So a major difference here is that the continuous form may be used to show that an action has recently stopped but may

11

not yet be completed. Also, the action usually took place over an extended period of time. Both tenses can also be used to denote actions which happened repeatedly, but we would have a preference for the continuous form in this case, e.g.

I've tried to get in touch with you. I've been trying to get in touch with you. The use of the second sentence would seem to indicate that the speaker has tried on many separate occasions to get in touch, while the first may or may not show this. Past Continuous Form Perhaps unsurprisingly the form of the Past Continuous closely resembles the Present Continuous except that the verb be (am, is, are depending on the subject) is used in its past tense form. So, in place of am and is we use was and instead of are we use were. The main verb is still the present participle -ing form. The full tense looks like this: Past Continuous (Progressive) I he she it you were we were not (weren't) they Meanings The Past Continuous is used to describe an action that was happening before a particular point in the past and was still in progress at that point. The action may or may not have continued after that point. was was not (wasn't) looking

He was still talking at 4:00. (He very probably continued talking past that time).

12

I was walking down the street when I saw an old friend from school. (It is not clear at this point whether I stopped to talk to my friend or whether I carried on without stopping). The second sentence is an example of this tense's most common use. As we saw above in the discussion on the Past Simple, the Past Continuous is often used to set the scene or background to a narrative and the Past Simple action then interrupts this situation. We can also use this tense with time expressions such as the whole..., every day, all day, every minute of... to describe events that extend over long periods of time.

We were walking the whole day yesterday. used to / would Form The forms for both of these auxiliaries are used to talk about the past. They are quite straightforward since neither of them changes for the subject and both are followed by the simple verb form, as you can see in the chart. used to/would I you he she it we they used to did not use to (didn't use to) would look

Meanings Both of these can be used as alternatives to the usual past tense to describe habits and to denote actions which took place over a period of time (not usually given in the same sentence) and which have since ceased to happen.

I used to smoke 40 cigarettes a day.

13

We would jump into the car and head for the sea. As you can see from the examples, both indicate repeated action over an extended period and also distance from the time of speaking. It would be odd to continue using these forms throughout the rest of the narrative so speakers will often switch back and forth between used to, would and the Past Simple. While both used to and would can be used to describe repeated actions in the past, only used to can be used for past states which occurred over a long stretch of time. For example, try replacing used to in the following sentences and see how you feel about the results.

I used to be lonely when I first moved here. The whole family used to belong to the local tennis club. I used to know the roads around here really well. You should have rejected the sentences with would as not being acceptable English. However, look at the next set of sentences which contain stative verbs and decide how you feel.

He wouldn't realise what had happened until someone pointed it out to him. I would often feel guilty about not taking the dog for a walk. She would be angry whenever I didn't finish my homework. In these examples the states did not occur over a long period of time, but were rather temporary, single actions repeated at various times in the past. In each case used to can, of course, be substituted. was going to / were going to Form This tense is formed by using was or were (depending on the subject) plus going to followed by the simple verb. was/were going to I he she it was going to look was not (wasn't) going to

14

you were going to we were not (weren't) going to they

Meanings We use this tense to describe a past intention that never actually occurred. We often find this form when someone is trying to give an excuse for not having done something that was expected of them or when someone feels that they have let another person down. The clause containing was/were going to is frequently followed immediately by but. We were going to come last week, but the weather was so awful. She was going to bring her new boyfriend along (but... is understood) My parents were going to go on holiday this year, but they didn't have enough money. Past Perfect Simple Form The Past Perfect Simple is made by adding the past participle (usually the verb form ending in -ed, but there are irregular verbs) to had, which does not change according its subject.

Past Perfect Simple I you had he had not (hadn't) she it looked

15

we they
Meanings

The Past Perfect can only be used to refer to something that happened and finished before another point in the past. You will never see this tense alongside any tense that refers to the present time. More often than not, this tense will be used in a clause that is connected to another clause containing the Past Simple - the words that connect these clauses are called conjunctions; some examples are: because, that, when, as soon as, so, after, before and so forth.

16

3. THE PASSIVE The passive voice is a grammatical construction (specifically, a "voice").

The noun or noun phrase that would be the object of an active sentence (such as Our troops defeated the enemy) appears as the subject of a sentence with passive voice (e.g. The enemy was defeated by our troops). The subject of a sentence or clause featuring the passive voice denotes the recipient of the action (the patient) rather than the performer (the agent). The passive voice in English is formed periphrastically: the usual form uses the auxiliary

verb be (or get) together with the past participle of the main verb. For example, Caesar was stabbed by Brutus uses the passive voice. The subject denotes the person (Caesar) affected by the action of the verb. The agent is expressed here with the phrase by Brutus, but this can be omitted. The equivalent sentence in 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 English passive varies with writing style and field. Some publications' style sheets discourage use of the passive voice, while others encourage it.[4]Although some purveyors of usage advice, including George Orwell (see Politics and the English Language, 1946) and William Strunk, Jr. and E. B. White (seeThe Elements of Style, 1919), discourage the English passive, its usefulness is generally recognized, particularly in cases where the patient is more important than the agent, but also in some cases where it is desired to emphasize the agent.

17

4. USAGE OF THE PASSIVE

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.

Three stores were robbed last night. (the identity of the agent may be unknown) A new cancer drug has been discovered. (the identity of the agent may be unimportant in the context)

Mistakes have been made on this project. (the speaker may not wish to identify the agent) The last sentence illustrates a frequently criticized use of the passive the

evasion of responsibility by failure to mention the agent (which may even be the speaker himself). Agentless passives are common in scientific writing, where the agent may be irrelevant:

The mixture was heated to 300C. However the passive voice can also be used together with a mention of the

agent, 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:

Don't you see? The patient was murdered by his own doctor!

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[5] (seeTopiccomment). There is a tendency for sentences to be formulated so as to place the focus at the end, and this can motivate the choice of active or passive voice:

18

My taxi hit an old lady. (the taxi is the topic, the lady is the focus) My mother was hit by a taxi. (the mother is the topic, the taxi is the focus) 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:

The breakthrough was achieved by Burlingame and Evans, two researchers in the university's genetic engineering lab

Passive constructions 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:

John threw the ball.

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 ball was thrown. original subject (the agent) can optionally be re-inserted using the

The

preposition by.

The ball was thrown by John. 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:

Bob was hit by the ball. Bob got hit by the ball.
19

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:

The food is being served. (present progressive passive) The stadium will have been built by next January. (future perfect passive) I would have got injured if I had stayed in my place. (conditional perfect passive with get)

It isn't nice to be insulted. (passive infinitive) Having been humiliated, he left the stage. (passive present participle, perfect aspect)

Promotion of indirect objects [edit] 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:

John gave Mary a book. Mary was given a book (by John).

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 dechticaetiative 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 toor 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 (this time being accompanied by to or for; see English grammar: Verb phrases). For example:

John gave Mary a book. Mary was given a book. (and not normally: ??A book was given Mary.)

20

John gave a book to Mary. A book was given to Mary. (and not: *Mary was given a book to.)

Similar restrictions apply to the prepositional passive, as noted in the following section. Prepositional passive [edit] It is also possible, in some cases, to promote the object of a preposition. This may be called the prepositional passive, or sometimes the pseudo-

passive (although the latter term can also have other meanings, particularly in descriptions of other languages).

They talked about the problem. The problem was talked about.

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 appear grammatically unacceptable; compare the following examples given by Pullum:

Someone has slept in this bunk. This bunk has been slept in. (fully acceptable) Someone has slept above this bunk. ??This bunk has been slept above. (barely acceptable) The second sentence appears unacceptable 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.[13] It is not 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:

Someone has put a child in this bunk. *This bunk has been put a child in. (unacceptable) Someone has put a child in this bunk. A child has been put in this bunk. (acceptable)

Stative and adjectival uses [edit]

21

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:

The window was broken, i.e Someone or something broke the window. (action, event)

The window was broken, i.e. The window was not intact. (resultant state) The first sentence is an example of the canonical English passive as described

above. However the second case is distinct; such sentences are not always considered to be true passives, since the participle is being used adjectivally;[13] they are sometimes called false passives. If they are considered to be passives, they may be called stative (or 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 Passive voice: Stative and dynamic passive.) 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, for which there exists an adjective open, so the sentence The door was opened more likely refers to the action rather than the state, since in the stative case one could simply say The door was open. 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:

She was relieved to find her car.

22

Here, relieved is an ordinary adjective, though it derives from the past participle of relieve.[23] 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".

23

5. CAUSATIVE FORM OF HAVE

Form be + verb 3 (past participle) 1. The verb be takes the same form as the main verb in the active voice.

Active: My mother washes my clothes. Passive: My clothes are washed by my mother. Active: My mother has washed my clothes. Passive: My clothes have been washed by my mother. Active: My mother will wash my clothes. Passive: My clothes will be washed by my mother. Active: My mother was washing my clothes. Passive: My clothes were being washed by my mother.

2. If there are two objects in the active sentence, two passive sentences are possible.

Active: They gave me 50 dollars to do it. Passive: I was given 50 dollars to do it. Passive: 50 dollars was given to me to do it.

3. Get is often used instead of be in informal spoken English.

I got offered the promotion! The table got damaged in the fire. I got asked to present the award.

4. The subject of the active verb (sometimes called the agent) is not usually expressed in passive sentences, because it is unknown or unimportant. However, if it is used, it is usually preceded with by.

The painting was done by Picasso.

5. When we talk about a tool used by an agent, it can be preceded by with.

The painting was done with oils on canvas.

24

Meaning 1. We use passive when who or what causes the action is not important or is not known, or when we want to focus on the action.

The rubbish is taken out every day. We don't know who takes the rubbish out, or maybe it's not important) The Great Wall of China was built thousands of years ago. It's not important exactly who built it, we want to focus on the action of building) All my money has been stolen. I don't know who stole it, I want to emphasise the action of stealing) My windows are cleaned once a month. (It's not important who cleans them. The action of cleaning is more important)

Form Have + object + verb 3 (past participle) - have something done

Have + object + infinitive -- have someone do something Meaning 1. We use causative when arranging for someone to do something for us.

They had their car repaired. (They arranged for someone to repair it) Compare: They repaired their car. (They did it themselves)

I had

my

hair

cut yesterday.

(I

went

to

the

hairdresser)

Compare: I cut my hair yesterday. (I cut it myself) 2. We use causative when someone does something to us.

Bill had his money stolen.

3. We can use have someone do something to talk about giving instructions or orders (more common in American English).

I had my assistant type the report. I'll have my lawyer look into it.

25

REFFERENCESS 1. http://www.eslbase.com/grammar/passive 2. http://www.tesol-direct.com/guide-to-english-grammar/past-tenses 3. From the United States Declaration of Independence (1776). 4. Mark Liberman, "'Passive Voice' 1397-2009 R.I.P.," in Language Log, 2009 March 12. 5. Nancy Franklin, "The Dolor of Money," The New Yorker, 2009 March 23, at 24, 25. 6. Mark Liberman, "The aggrieved passive voice," in Language Log, 2009 March 16. 7. Pullum, Geoffrey K (17 April 2009). "50 Years of Stupid Grammar Advice". The Chronicle of Higher Education 55 (32): B15. Retrieved 2009-0412. 8. The American Heritage Book of English Usage (1996). 9. Geoffrey K. Pullum. "The passive in English". Language Lo

26