Question about grammar...

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

For the record, when you write for someplace with a standard styleguide they will usually prohibit passive voice to a stupid degree. Here is a recent Language Log (a great blog by the way by descriptivist, rather than prescriptivist, linguists)

"Deliciously"? Me thinks these folks are a bit too into grammar.

[Alex]

These folks are academic linguistics professors and researchers so I imagine they are way too far into it.

But it is a good blog if a bit technical at times, particularly when they talk about etymology and word choice shifts.

MBC, can you post sample sentences that confuse you as to why they're in passive? Keep in mind, as well, that Word is not a perfect grammarian and it may get confused as well as to how you're really using a word compared to how it thinks you are.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

The concept that there should be a percentage of active vs. passive sentences, or that one or another should be avoided ... is moronic on its face to me.

As far as percentages go, I didn't necessarily mean it in the literal sense, as if I should be striving for 6% and anything written that exceeds it is automatically garbage. Rather, I'm just trying to get a feel for for what a reasonable balance between the two should be.

Interestingly enough, when it comes to music, an area in which I do have a firm grasp of "the rules", I spend a lot of time breaking them and look upon most of them as silly. I trust my ear to tell me what sounds acceptable and what doesn't at this point. However, when something sounds wrong to me, I generally know why.

And that is the purpose of my post (upon more reflection), not to truly define what is acceptable or not, I suppose, but rather learn a bit more about the "why and why not" so that I can improve. I do understand that it all has to be taken with a grain of salt and that, ultimately, it is about how the words sound and how clearly they convey the message, that is important.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

MBC, can you post sample sentences that confuse you as to why they're in passive? Keep in mind, as well, that Word is not a perfect grammarian and it may get confused as well as to how you're really using a word compared to how it thinks you are.

I suppose we could take my original post for starters. I'm not seeing the eight percent.

[Ghoulish Delight]

One of the things that seem to pop up most frequently is that passive sentences seem to be universally frowned upon

For starters, Word's probably catching this one. "Passive sentences" is the subject of the clause at the end*, while there is an implied object that is the actor the verb "frowned".

Is there a better way to say it? There are definitely alternate ways, though in this case that use may be preferable from the standpoint that it's a common usage and you're likely trying to draw on the familiarity of it.






*subordinate clause. Geez, that was bugging me Strike that (oh wait, I just did). Re-read, and the first half of the sentence is actually subordinate.

[Prudence]

The passive voice thing can be a major PITA.

As with so many things, it's a stylistic issue and therefore very context-dependant. It's not an evil in the same vein as noun-verb agreement, although that is frequently how it is presented nowadays.

In some contexts (maybe technical reports, for an example?) passive voice is nealy unavoidable. On the other hand, if I'm doing a formal persuasive piece the active voice can be more compelling.

And perhaps the most important reason to distinguish between the two is when it affects the bottom line. If your ability to continue to receive a pay check is directly affected by your use of active over passive voice, then active voice is your new best friend.

[Prudence]

Ask Betty is a new UW site that addresses grammar issues. I think you have to have a UW login to ask a specific question, but the info posted is available to all. The link above is to the passive/active voice page. I just checked it out and I approve of their take. Not that they need my approval, but there it is.

[Alex]

Well, there are only 14 sentences in that post (15 counting the PS) so 8% is 1.12 sentences. Presumably the 8% is rounded and there is actually on passive voice sentence. So it really isn't as bad as you were probably thinking.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by Motorboat Cruiser

As far as percentages go, I didn't necessarily mean it in the literal sense, as if I should be striving for 6% and anything written that exceeds it is automatically garbage. Rather, I'm just trying to get a feel for for what a reasonable balance between the two should be.

There is none, IMO. As long as you are transmitting your ideas clearly and succinctly, I don’t think it matters. If something is easier for the reader to comprehend written in 100% passive voice, then do so. Writing by formula is rarely successful.


ETA: That paragraph has no passive sentances, BTW

[Alex]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Is there a better way to say it? There are definitely alternate ways, though in this case that use may be preferable from the standpoint that it's a common usage and you're likely trying to draw on the familiarity of it.

The problem with active voice at all times is that it pretty much requires that the actor be made explicit rather than implied as it in this sentence. And sometimes that creates more specificity than you want. But one way to rewrite the sentence could be

One of the things that seem to pop up most frequently is that experts universally frown upon passive sentences.

From style issues I would also tend to avoid constructions like "seems to be" which you used twice in the original sentence and feels like passive voice (subject seems to actor) but I'm not entirely confident it actually is passive. Take responsibility for your conclustions.

One of the things popping up most frequently is that experts universally frown on passive sentences.

That is the most frequent complaint about passive, particularly in what is supposed to be persuasive writing. That is allows the speaker to hedge, shuffling off responsibility for thoughts and actions.