Patient-related constraints on get- and be-passive uses in English: Evidence from paraphrasing

In English, transitive events can be described in various ways. The main possibilities are active-voice and passive-voice, which are assumed to have distinct semantic and pragmatic functions. Within the passive, there are two further options, namely be-passive or get-passive. While these two forms a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dominic eThompson, Shuping eLing, Andriy eMyachykov, Fernanda eFerreira, Christoph eScheepers
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2013-11-01
Series:Frontiers in Psychology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00848/full
id doaj-6c11e924224749d6ab65c122edc593b0
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6c11e924224749d6ab65c122edc593b02020-11-25T00:34:38ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychology1664-10782013-11-01410.3389/fpsyg.2013.0084859732Patient-related constraints on get- and be-passive uses in English: Evidence from paraphrasingDominic eThompson0Shuping eLing1Andriy eMyachykov2Fernanda eFerreira3Christoph eScheepers4University of GlasgowUniversity of GlasgowNorthumbria UniversityUniversity of South CarolinaUniversity of GlasgowIn English, transitive events can be described in various ways. The main possibilities are active-voice and passive-voice, which are assumed to have distinct semantic and pragmatic functions. Within the passive, there are two further options, namely be-passive or get-passive. While these two forms are generally understood to differ, there is little agreement on precisely how and why. The passive Patient is frequently cited as playing a role, though again agreement on the specifics is rare. Here we present three paraphrasing experiments investigating Patient-related constraints on the selection of active versus passive voice, and be- versus get-passive, respectively. Participants either had to re-tell short stories in their own words (Experiments 1 and 2) or had to answer specific questions about the Patient in those short stories (Experiment 3). We found that a given Agent in a story promotes the use of active-voice, while a given Patient promotes be-passives specifically. Meanwhile, get-passive use increases when the Patient is marked as important. We argue that the three forms of transitive description are functionally and semantically distinct, and can be arranged along two dimensions: Patient Prominence and Patient Importance. We claim that active-voice has a near-complementary relationship with the be-passive, driven by which protagonist is given. Since both get and be are passive, they share the features of a Patient-subject and an optional Agent by-phrase; however, get specifically responds to a Patient being marked as important. Each of these descriptions has its own set of features that differentiate it from the others.http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00848/fullVoiceinformation structureTransitivityparaphrasingpassivizationget-passive
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Dominic eThompson
Shuping eLing
Andriy eMyachykov
Fernanda eFerreira
Christoph eScheepers
spellingShingle Dominic eThompson
Shuping eLing
Andriy eMyachykov
Fernanda eFerreira
Christoph eScheepers
Patient-related constraints on get- and be-passive uses in English: Evidence from paraphrasing
Frontiers in Psychology
Voice
information structure
Transitivity
paraphrasing
passivization
get-passive
author_facet Dominic eThompson
Shuping eLing
Andriy eMyachykov
Fernanda eFerreira
Christoph eScheepers
author_sort Dominic eThompson
title Patient-related constraints on get- and be-passive uses in English: Evidence from paraphrasing
title_short Patient-related constraints on get- and be-passive uses in English: Evidence from paraphrasing
title_full Patient-related constraints on get- and be-passive uses in English: Evidence from paraphrasing
title_fullStr Patient-related constraints on get- and be-passive uses in English: Evidence from paraphrasing
title_full_unstemmed Patient-related constraints on get- and be-passive uses in English: Evidence from paraphrasing
title_sort patient-related constraints on get- and be-passive uses in english: evidence from paraphrasing
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Frontiers in Psychology
issn 1664-1078
publishDate 2013-11-01
description In English, transitive events can be described in various ways. The main possibilities are active-voice and passive-voice, which are assumed to have distinct semantic and pragmatic functions. Within the passive, there are two further options, namely be-passive or get-passive. While these two forms are generally understood to differ, there is little agreement on precisely how and why. The passive Patient is frequently cited as playing a role, though again agreement on the specifics is rare. Here we present three paraphrasing experiments investigating Patient-related constraints on the selection of active versus passive voice, and be- versus get-passive, respectively. Participants either had to re-tell short stories in their own words (Experiments 1 and 2) or had to answer specific questions about the Patient in those short stories (Experiment 3). We found that a given Agent in a story promotes the use of active-voice, while a given Patient promotes be-passives specifically. Meanwhile, get-passive use increases when the Patient is marked as important. We argue that the three forms of transitive description are functionally and semantically distinct, and can be arranged along two dimensions: Patient Prominence and Patient Importance. We claim that active-voice has a near-complementary relationship with the be-passive, driven by which protagonist is given. Since both get and be are passive, they share the features of a Patient-subject and an optional Agent by-phrase; however, get specifically responds to a Patient being marked as important. Each of these descriptions has its own set of features that differentiate it from the others.
topic Voice
information structure
Transitivity
paraphrasing
passivization
get-passive
url http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00848/full
work_keys_str_mv AT dominicethompson patientrelatedconstraintsongetandbepassiveusesinenglishevidencefromparaphrasing
AT shupingeling patientrelatedconstraintsongetandbepassiveusesinenglishevidencefromparaphrasing
AT andriyemyachykov patientrelatedconstraintsongetandbepassiveusesinenglishevidencefromparaphrasing
AT fernandaeferreira patientrelatedconstraintsongetandbepassiveusesinenglishevidencefromparaphrasing
AT christophescheepers patientrelatedconstraintsongetandbepassiveusesinenglishevidencefromparaphrasing
_version_ 1725312327639629824