Passive be damned: The construction that wouldn't be beaten

This thesis brings together two different lines of research, the nature of passive voice, the nature of readability. Commonly, languages have a range of tools for detransitivisation, topicalisation, and impersonalisation, of which passivisation is one (Givón, 1981). Passives have important roles in...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Allan, Stu
Language:en
Published: University of Canterbury. Languages, Cultures and Linguistics 2009
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/10092/2265
id ndltd-canterbury.ac.nz-oai-ir.canterbury.ac.nz-10092-2265
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-canterbury.ac.nz-oai-ir.canterbury.ac.nz-10092-22652015-03-30T15:27:45ZPassive be damned: The construction that wouldn't be beatenAllan, Stupassivespassive voiceactivesactive voicevoicepassive clausesreadabilityThis thesis brings together two different lines of research, the nature of passive voice, the nature of readability. Commonly, languages have a range of tools for detransitivisation, topicalisation, and impersonalisation, of which passivisation is one (Givón, 1981). Passives have important roles in our language, and prescribing against their use lacks a full understanding of these roles. Much of the concern around passives from writers, editors, and teachers is no more than folklore that has not clearly analysed various writing and reading problems. Many awkward sentences are not awkward because they use passives but because they are wordy, clumsy, or pretentious. Most criticisms have little basis in linguistic theory, and rarely is there more than passing mention of the important role that passives play in communication. Some uses of passives are inappropriate, being vague, ambiguous, or even deceitful. These inappropriate uses of passive voice give the construction a bad name. They have become ammunition for prescriptive grammarians to fire at all uses of passives, often with weak analysis and minimal reference to linguistic theory. ‘Avoid passives’ has become a mantra. I tentatively suggest that there is unlikely to be a cost to processing passives. Given the speed at which the brain processes clauses, any differences in readability (if they exist) must be miniscule. Consequently, I suggest that any differences are unimportant relative to the benefits that appropriately used passives bring to readability. Furthermore, appropriately used passives may actually improve readability, especially when there is greater interest in the passive subject than the active subject, and when the passive serves to connect clauses or sentences.University of Canterbury. Languages, Cultures and Linguistics2009-03-30T02:07:23Z2009-03-30T02:07:23Z2009Electronic thesis or dissertationTexthttp://hdl.handle.net/10092/2265enNZCUCopyright Stu Allanhttp://library.canterbury.ac.nz/thesis/etheses_copyright.shtml
collection NDLTD
language en
sources NDLTD
topic passives
passive voice
actives
active voice
voice
passive clauses
readability
spellingShingle passives
passive voice
actives
active voice
voice
passive clauses
readability
Allan, Stu
Passive be damned: The construction that wouldn't be beaten
description This thesis brings together two different lines of research, the nature of passive voice, the nature of readability. Commonly, languages have a range of tools for detransitivisation, topicalisation, and impersonalisation, of which passivisation is one (Givón, 1981). Passives have important roles in our language, and prescribing against their use lacks a full understanding of these roles. Much of the concern around passives from writers, editors, and teachers is no more than folklore that has not clearly analysed various writing and reading problems. Many awkward sentences are not awkward because they use passives but because they are wordy, clumsy, or pretentious. Most criticisms have little basis in linguistic theory, and rarely is there more than passing mention of the important role that passives play in communication. Some uses of passives are inappropriate, being vague, ambiguous, or even deceitful. These inappropriate uses of passive voice give the construction a bad name. They have become ammunition for prescriptive grammarians to fire at all uses of passives, often with weak analysis and minimal reference to linguistic theory. ‘Avoid passives’ has become a mantra. I tentatively suggest that there is unlikely to be a cost to processing passives. Given the speed at which the brain processes clauses, any differences in readability (if they exist) must be miniscule. Consequently, I suggest that any differences are unimportant relative to the benefits that appropriately used passives bring to readability. Furthermore, appropriately used passives may actually improve readability, especially when there is greater interest in the passive subject than the active subject, and when the passive serves to connect clauses or sentences.
author Allan, Stu
author_facet Allan, Stu
author_sort Allan, Stu
title Passive be damned: The construction that wouldn't be beaten
title_short Passive be damned: The construction that wouldn't be beaten
title_full Passive be damned: The construction that wouldn't be beaten
title_fullStr Passive be damned: The construction that wouldn't be beaten
title_full_unstemmed Passive be damned: The construction that wouldn't be beaten
title_sort passive be damned: the construction that wouldn't be beaten
publisher University of Canterbury. Languages, Cultures and Linguistics
publishDate 2009
url http://hdl.handle.net/10092/2265
work_keys_str_mv AT allanstu passivebedamnedtheconstructionthatwouldntbebeaten
_version_ 1716798098431279104