Category of voice in modern english

1.2 The problems of Voice

The two constructions have been the subject of many discussions in the linguistic literature. Some linguists are against this interpretation. So, for instance, L.S. Barkhudarov and L.A. Shteling argue that in such cases we have a passive voice; the idea of state is not inherent to the construction as a whole but to the past participle whose actual meaning is determined by the meaning of the verb it derives from. It is only in the context that we can say which is which. The scholars think that it is only when the past participle has been subjected to adjectivization that we can speak of a nominal predicate construction, e.g. I am very interested. B. Khaimovich and B. Rogovskaya are inclined to believe that such constructions as. The door was closed cannot be treated as passive. These are ‘passive’ constructions which have no active counterparts. Consider another example:

His duty is fulfilled. The sentence corresponds rather to He has fulfilled his duty rather than to He fulfills his duty.
M. Blokh thinks that the grammatical status of a construction is determined not by the meaning in isolation; it is determined by the semantic properties of its constituents, its participial part in particular. If the participle expresses a process, then the whole construction is passive and if the participle expresses a result, the whole construction is a nominal predicate. Cf.
You are mistaken. vs. I was often mistaken for my friend.
As for the sentence The door was closed, the participle is wholly neutralized and only a living context may deneutralize it both ways. Cf.
The door was closed by the janitor.
The door is often closed.
The door on the left was closed, and the door on the right was open.
To ‘voice stimulating’ means belong the forms of the future, the progressive and the perfect.
The main differences between the two types of passives are:
1. Get-passives are characteristically used in sentences involving adversity or benefit (e.g. Kim got sacked. vs. Kim got promoted);
2. Get-passives tend to be avoided in formal style.
However, get is not a grammatical word-morpheme; it is not devoid of lexical content. Hence, it is not an analytic construction in this sense (Gregory Ward, Betty Birner, Rodney Huddleston, 2002).
Opinions differ as to the number of voices in Modern English. Most linguists recognize only two voices – active and passive. Some (e.g. B. Ilyish) speak of the reflexive voice which shows that the process passes on to the subject, e.g. John is shaving himself.
Transformationally, John is shaving himself derives from John + pres. be + ing shave + John. The derivation shows that John is both the Subject and the Objective Complement, or, in semantic terms, John is both the Agent and the Affected (patient). This is an explicitly reflexive construction, i.e. a construction in which the Affected is actualized as a reflexive pronoun. This function may not be realized in the surface structure, i.e. reflexivity may not be stated explicitly, e. g.
He never shaves before lunch.
Inexplicit-reflexive constructions are not very common in English.
The analyst is faced with the linguistic status of self-pronouns. The problem is whether self-pronouns used in such sentences as John is shaving himself are auxiliary words (grammatical word-morphemes) used for forming a special voice of the verb, thus making part of an analytic verb form, or words performing the function of a separate part of the sentence, i.e. the Objective Complement.
We can hardly prove that self-pronouns, although weakened semantically, have turned into a kind of grammatical word-morphemes. As is rightly pointed out by B. Khaimovich and B. Rogovskaya, «If we regard washed himself as an analytical word, it is necessary to admit that the verb has the categories of gender (washed himself – washed herself), person – non-person (washed himself – washed itself), that the categories of number and person are expressed twice in the word washes himself». The existence of such sentences as She washed herself and the baby clearly demonstrates that self-pronouns function as the Objective Complement of the verb.
The other voices distinguished in English are reciprocal and middle. The reciprocal voice is expressed with the help of reciprocal pronouns added to a verb, e.g.
They kissed each other.
The problem is similar to that of the reflexive voice – are reciprocal pronouns each other or one another grammatical word morphemes or lexical words? Examples such as They kissed each other and the child suggest that the pronouns cannot be treated as grammatical word morphemes.
The so-called ‘middle’ voice1 can be illustrated by such sentences as The door opened. Semantically, this sentence reminds us of the passive sentence proper; yet it cannot be completed with the by-construction: The door opened by the wind, only The door was opened by the wind. Examples of that kind have been treated in the linguistic literature as the notional passive or activo-passive constructions. In semantic syntax, they are related to the corresponding causative sentences:
The wind opened the door. – The door opened.
Transformationally, The door opened is obtained by the deletion of the Agent wind and the rearrangement of the remaining parts. It will be noted that the semantic relation between the verb opened and the noun the door is the same in both sentences. The verb that is in a position to construct such sentences is referred to as ergative, and such sentences are referred to as ergative pairs.
There is one more ‘middle’ voice construction in English which is also mentioned in the literature in connection with the category of voice. Consider:


The play acts well.
The book is selling excellently.
The fabric washes easily.
The door won’t open.
Glass breaks easily.

Such sentences express a characteristic property of the entity realized by the adjuncts well, excellently, easily. Semantically, such sentences are similar to the type of sentence discussed above. However, there is a difference: sentences of the type The door opened can be easily rewritten as passive sentences proper The door opened vs. The door was opened. As for the type The play acts well, the passive transformation is not always possible. Cf.

Glass breaks easily. vs. Glass can be broken easily. But:
This novel reads very well vs. This novel can be read very well.
Neither the sentence-type The door opened nor The door won’t open can be regarded as passive sentences proper, despite similarity in meaning, for the simple reason that they cannot be completed with the by-agent construction. The suppression of the Agent imparts a new meaning to the sentence: the meaning of a characteristic property. According to Halliday (1967), this type of verb is especially frequent in simple present tense, particularly in negative sentences where the form is don’t/won’t and not can’t; it is not, however, restricted to these verbal forms, and may in fact occur with any tense form, especially with certain – ly adverbs. The scholar calls the type of verbal form process-oriented in contradistinction to the agent-oriented type in The clothes were washed. To process-oriented forms we can also add forms in The door opened, The wheel is turning. However, these ‘self-acting’ processes differ from The door won’t open which implies that it is due to some property of the door that I cannot open it. In Armenian and in Russian, the equivalent of the so-called process-oriented forms may take the form of a reflexive. Cf.
The fabric washes easily. vs. Այս կտորը հեշտ է լվացվում: Этoт мaтeрuaл лeгкo cтupaeтcя.
Armenian speakers generally avoid using the reflexive verb under the circumstances, giving priority to non-reflexive forms – active or passive, e.g. Այս կտորը հեշտ է լվանալ:
The passive voice is extensively used in Modern English. There are many more passive constructions in English than in Russian. We know that in Armenian only the direct object of an active construction may be used as subject of a parallel passive construction.
Ուսանողները կատարել են այդ վարժությունները երեկ: Այդ վարժությունները երեկ են արվել:
In English we may place in the centre of our attention as subject of a passive construction not only such an object (person or thing) which in a parallel active construction would be a direct object, but also an indirect. Moreover, even intransitive verbs with prepositional objects may be used in the passive. Thus we see that with regard to voice the division of verbs into subjective and objective, and not into transitive or intransitive, is the most important division for Modern English, as any objective verb can form a passive construction:
Ac t i v e: The student wrote that exercise yesterday (direct object).
P a s s i v e: That exercise was written yesterday.
A c t i v e: I showed him (indirect object) his mistakes.
P a s s i v e: He was shown his mistakes.
Ac t i v e: People spoke much about that book (prepositional object).
P a s s i v e: The book was much spoken about.