Modern English Grammar

"Oh!" cried Fleur, "What did you -- what could you have done in those old days?" (Що ж ти зробив, що міг ти зробити в ті далекі дні?) (Galsworthy)

Fleur tore herself from his grasp.

"You didn't -- you couldn't have tried.

You --you betrayed me, Father". (Galsworthy)

Come, darling, better go to bed. I'll make it up to you, somehow. How fatuous! Bui what could he have said? (...Нісенітні слова. Але що він міг їй сказати?) (Galsworthy)

Constructional homonymy in patterns with modal verbs must not escape the notice of the student.

Compare also the following:

a) Had he known about b) My mother once mar-

it he could have helped you ried without love. How could yesterday (could have she have! (Galsworthy)

helped -- a non-fact). (could have married -- a real

action in the past)

should + Infinitive

Should in its primary meaning, especially when stressed, denotes obligation, duty or propriety, e. g.: I think you should help him. You should be more attentive.

Besides its use as a modal auxiliary in the Subjunctive Mood, should is widely current in its secondary functions where its distributional meaning presents special difficulties of grammatical analysis.

The first to be mentioned here are such patterns implying logical inference as: He should be a good pilot as he has had plenty of flying experience. The two should have so much in common. In both the sentences the implication is that something should or ought to be the case according to appearances or logic.

The range of should is wider in that-clauses than in independent sentences. With a governing expression resolving the ambiguity, its use has naturally extended to that-clauses implying determination, desire, command, etc. whether in the affirmative or in the negative, whether from the point of view of the speaker or writer or from that of some person spoken about.

The use of should of duty and propriety stands in sharp contrast to the use of should in that-clauses with expressions of emotion, e. g.: "I am surprised -- I might say, shocked --- that you should have mentioned this" where should seems to suggest something that is the very opposite to duty or propriety.

There is a similar contrast between should of logical inference and should with expressions of emotion, which appears from the fact that a sentence with should takes on an altogether different meaning if it is connected with an expression of emotion, as, for example, You two should have so much in common, compared with I am surprised that you two should have so much in common. In a context in which the former sentence is valid, the latter would make no sense. The same considerations apply, m the main, to expressions of disbelief, as, for example, ...it is impossible that he should fail where should suggests logical inference but in a negative way.

It is important to observe the differentiation of meaning in patterns like the following: You should work harder > You shall work harder. The former is not a straightforward command. It is more impersonal than ''You shall work harder" in so far as it refers to a common standard of propriety and not to the will of the speaker, but it is more personal than this phrase because it suggests a thoughtful, not to say sympathetic, state of mind. In point of fact, "You should" is weaker and generally more courteous than the brusque and dictatorial "You shall". It does not force the speaker's will upon the hearer in the same way as "You shall" does. If we say "You should work harder", we probably wish you to put some more energy into your work, but we do not find it necessary to tell you so straight out. We are suggesting, considerately, the presence of necessity, duty, or obligation, but we are concerned not to give you the impression that we are imposing it upon you. If the thing is to be done, it is not because we wish it but because it is required by a general standard of propriety or obligation, a standard that may apply to everybody.

The verb should in all persons has its most characteristic use in patterns where the modal phrase expresses a real action with emphasis laid on the fact that it does or did take place. Variant subtle shades of subjective modal force in giving one's opinion of an actual fact are generally signalled by the context.

The question of the present state and further prospects of international trade is one of great moments to all countries and it was therefore only logical that it should have received such close attention at the Council meeting.

(should have received = has received)

That science in the USSR should have attained so high a level of development is but natural.

(should have attained = has attained)

The use of should V_inf is fairly common in passing a judgement of an emphatic emotional character (subjective evaluation, approval or disapproval, surprise or indignation) on some occurrence.

Thus, it is strange that he exercised (or has exercised) so great influence merely states the fact, whereas: It is strange that he should exercise (or should have exercised) so great influence lays more stress on the strangeness of the action. Similarly: "It is strange that he should behave like that" is synonymous with "It is strange that he behaves like that."

It seems practical to distinguish the following uses:

a) should V_inf in complex sentences, e. g.:

Odd that one whose life was spent in bringing to the public eye all the private coils of property, the domestic disagreements of others, should dread so utterly the public eye turned on his own; and yet not odd, for who should know so well as he the whole unfeeling process of legal regulation. (Galsworthy)

(odd that one should dread = odd that one dreads) It was a monstrous, scandalous thing, that the police should take such idle, malicious gossip seriously. (Joyce)

(should take -- took)

It did matter that some person or some principle outside oneself should be more precious than oneself. (Galsworthy)

(should be more precious = is more precious)

...The idea that George should have taste almost appalled him. (Galsworthy)

(should have taste = has taste)

It is but right that she should see the doctor once in a while. (Cronin)

(should see = sees)

b) should V_inf in sentences with why and how, e. g.:

"Oh, damn it!" he exclaimed, half angrily, half selfcommiseratingly, in combined rage and shame. "Why should I cry? What the devil's the matter with me, anyhow?" (Dreiser)

But if nothing mattered, why should he feel like that? (Galsworthy)

c) should V_inf in infinitival sentences, e. g.:

...To think that her fine, wonderful Frank should be compelled to come to this -- to cry!

will + Infinitive

Patterns with the verb will in its secondary function may be compared with the analogous use of the verb must. In its modal content will seems to be more subjective and implies a supposition based not upon some facts but rather upon the speaker's own considerations, e. g.: "It's not like Jolyon to be late!" he said to Irene, with uncontrollable vexation. "I suppose it'll be June keeping him!" (Galsworthy)

The verb will in such cases must naturally follow the rule of the sequence of tenses, which is the case, for instance, in contexts with the free reported speech, e. g.: Jon would be in London by now in Park, perhaps, crossing the Serpentine. (Galsworthy)

Patterns with will + Infinitive II, rather common in colloquial use, imply supposition with reference to a past action logically connected with the present. In its grammatical content will + Infinitive II goes parallel with the analogous meaning expressed by may + Infinitive II, e. g.: They have been here some time. Mary will have taken the children to the cinema. (Cf. syn. Will have taken = may have taken = has probably taken).

Next come patterns with would + Infinitive I or II which imply supposition made at present with regard to some action in the past, e. g.: There were Dornifords when I was a girl. Where was that? Oh! Algeciras! He was a colonel at Gibraltar. "That would be his father, I expect". (Galsworthy) In terms of meaning, such patterns go parallel with the use of the Past Tense (would be his father = was his father, I suppose).

Colloquial use has comparatively recently adopted the use of I wouldn't know for I don't know; he would know for he, certainly, knows, e.g.: "If George is there", said Winifred, "he would know". (Galsworthy)

VOICE

Active:: Passive

in the English Voice System

Languages differ greatly in their idiosyncrasies, i. e. in the forms which they have adopted, in the peculiarities of their usages in the combinative power of words and idiomatic forms of grammar peculiar to that language and not generally found in other languages.

From this point of view the category of voice presents a special linguistic interest. Passive constructions play an important part in the English verb-system. Modern English, especially in its later periods, has developed the use of passive formations to a very great extent.

As a grammatical category voice is the form of the verb which shows the relation between the action and its subject indicating whether the action is performed by the subject or passes on to it. Accordingly there are two voices in English: the active and the passive. The active voice shows that the action is performed by its subject, that the subject is the doer of the action. The passive voice shows that the subject is acted upon, that it is the recipient of the action, e.g.:

I wrote a letter. A letter was written by me.

Transformational relations for voice may be symbolised as follows:

N₁ + V_act + N₂ N₂ + V_pass + by + N₁

The choice of the passive construction is often due to the fact that the agent is unknown or the speaker prefers not to speak of him.

Sometimes the agent is dropped altogether when it is unknown, well knows or unimportant. Only the passive makes this economy possible.

The passive voice is known to be expressed by analytic combinations of the auxiliary verb be with the past participle of the notional verb.

Another passive, formed with get as auxiliary and the past participle, seems to be increasing in frequency, though grammarians are at present not agreed as to its status.

The verb get can function in a manner very similar with be, e. g.: My dress got caught on a nail. He got struck by a stone.

To get seems closer to the true passive auxiliary to be in patterns like the following: She got blamed for everything. She gets teased by the other children. He gets punished regularly. But with all the similarity of the two verbs used in such patterns get is unlike be in the primary paradigm. We can say, for instance, He gets punished regularly, but we shall hardly attest Gets he punished regularly?

It should be noted that to get is often used in preference to the verb to be because the true passive would not be clearly distinguishable from combinations of the full predicator be and participial adjective complements.

Compare to be married and to get married. As is known, to be married can have two meanings: «одружитися» and «бути одруженим» while to get married is unambiguous: it can mean only "to arrive at the married state".

The group to become + past participle expresses primarily state, e. g.: 1) The umbrella is not a possession lightly to be lost. Yet lost it becomes although it should not. 2) I have become very sunburnt.

Describing the "voice" system in English structural grammarians * often lay emphasis on the fact that voice, which theoretically indicates whether the subject acts (active voice), is acted on (passive voice), performs the action for itself (dynamic voice), or acts on itself (reflexive voice), is relatively unimportant in English. The passive voice is accordingly regarded as a word-order device for giving emphasis to what would normally be inner or outer complements. H. Whitehall, for instance, makes reference to words forming the inner and outer complements of the standard sentence by the use of passive constructions.

The words to be emphasised are moved to position 1, the verb is transformed into a word-group (be, become or get + V_en) and the original subject (position 1) is hooked onto the end of the sentence by means of the preposition by (occasionally through):

As a matter of fact, the communication is exactly the same in the two sentences given above. They represent merely two views of the facts, one from the side of the doer, the other from the side of the thing done. Except for the word order, the form of the verb, and the preposition by they are the same.

It seems practical to make distinction between a) direct or primary passive, b) indirect or secondary passive and c) tertiary or prepositional passive ¹.

The direct (primary) passive is formed in most cases from transitive verbs. The subject of the passive construction generally corresponds to the direct object of the verb.

I wrote a letter. A letter was written by me.

Further examples of such formations will be found in patterns known in traditional grammar as the Nominative with the Infinitive, e. g.:

They were not allowed to stay here.

He is said to be most diligent.

The direct passive is fairly common in sentence-patterns with the anticipatory it, e. g.:

It was agreed that we should make such experiments in the open air.

It was arranged that the expedition should start without delay.

Syntactic structures with the direct passive have a high frequency value but there are certain restrictions in their use conditioned by the grammatical organisation of the sentence:

the passive construction is impossible, for instance, when the direct object is expressed, a reflexive pronoun or a noun with a possessive pronoun referring to the same person as the subject of the sentence, as in: He hurt himself. Peter hurt his arm.

there are no passive forms in such phrasal verbs as, for instance, to take part, to take courage, to take flight, to take alarm, to lose heart, to take heart and still others.

Certain phrases of this sort, however, admit of a passive construction, e. g.: to lose sight of, to take care, to take responsibility, to pay attention and some others, e. g:

No responsibility is taken for the loss of personal property (hotel notice).

Attention must be paid to the results of the first experiment.

Such things should not be lost sight of.

On account of the infinite variety of lexical meanings inherent in verbs the structural relations between verbs and their objects are so flexible that to draw a rigid line of demarcation between the different types of objects is, indeed, not an easy thing to dp.

Relations between verbs and their objects vary according to the variant meanings of the verbs themselves as seen in the following instances given by H. Sweet: kill the calf, kill the time, run a risk, run a business, answer a letter, a question, a person, pay the bill, pay six shillings, pay the cabman, fill a pipe, fill an office, etc., etc.

A peculiarity of constitution hardly to be paralleled in other European languages will be found in sentence patterns with different kind of the indirect or secondary passive.

There are a number of verbs which take two objects -- a direct and an indirect object. The following are most frequent among them: to allow, to ask, to award, to give, to grant, to leave, to offer, to promise, to send, to show, to teach, to tell.

These verbs admit of two passive constructions:

A book was given to him (the direct primary passive)

He was given a book (the indirect secondary passive)

The indirect (secondary) passive is not infrequent in verb-phrases with the verb to give, such as: to give credit, to give command, to give a chance, to give a choice, to give an explanation, to give an opportunity, to give orders, to give shelter, and the like.

He was given a good to chance to argue.

She is given an opportunity to go to the south in summer.

Suppose, you are given a choice. What would you prefer?

There are many verbs in English which take a direct and an indirect object in the active construction, but they admit only one passive construction -- the direct passive, e. g.: to bring, to do, to play, to telegraph and many others. The list could be extended. Other verbs are not reversed in particular turns of meaning. Thus, have has no passive when it is statal, as in: She has gold hair.

Next come constructions with the so-called prepositional or tertiary-passive. What in the active is the object of a preposition connected with a verb or with a verb and its object may be made the subject of a passive construction. The subject of the passive construction corresponds to the prepositional object. This "detached" preposition retains its place after the verb. Familiar examples are:

He was sent for and taken care of.

She could not bear being read to any longer.

He is not to be relied upon.

The prepositional passive is not used with verbs which take two objects, direct and prepositional: to explain something to somebody, to point out, to announce, to dedicate, to devote, to say, to suggest, to propose, etc. They can have only a direct construction, e. g.: The difficulty was explained to them. The mistake to the rule was pointed out to the man. A new-plan was suggested to us.

The prepositional passive is not very frequent in occurrence. Its use is common with rather a limited number of verbs, such as:

1) verbs of saying: to speak about (of, to), to talk about (of), to comment on, etc., e. g.:

The new play was much spoken of.

2) verbs expressing scorn or contempt: to frown at, to laugh at, to mock at, to jeer at, to sneer at, etc., e. g.:

This idea was first jeered at.

He could not understand why his words were laughed at.

3) a miscellaneous group of verbs, such as: to look at, to look upon (on), to look after, to look for, to approve (disapprove) of, to account for, to send for, to rely on, to think of, e. g.:

He was sent for and taken care of.

Here is Irene to be thought of.

Observe, however, that the passive construction with the "retained" object (or "remaining accusative") has limits and is impossible with particular verbs or particular objects, e. g.: we can say "something was fetched me", but scarcely "I was fetched something". On the other hand, "The trouble was spared me" is not so natural as " I was spared the trouble". Possibilities are sometimes ever more limited; e. g.: we cannot say either "I was cost nothing" or "Nothing was cost me."

Certain verbs of removal and exclusion (such as: banish, expel, dischange, eject, exclude, exile, forbid) governing two objects are used chiefly in the passive, e. g.:

He was banished the realm. He was dismissed the service.

They have been expelled from the school.

The infinitive as a second object is found with a number of verbs, such as: allow, ask, beg, beseech, bid, command, compel, declare, entreat, feel, force, encourage, incline, induce, know, lead, make, order, observe, persuade, pray, prefer, perceive, presume, pronounce, see, teach, understand, wish, etc.

In terms of grammatical aspects of style, the usefulness of the passive merits special consideration.

The more formal referential character of passive verbal forms as compared to the active voice makes it possible to use them for stylistic purposes, as, for instance, J. Galsworthy masterly does in transferring to his pages the atmosphere of stiffness and cold restraint felt at June's treat dinner:

Dinner began in silence; the women facing one another, and the men. In silence the soup was finished -- excellent, if a little thick; and fish was brought. In silence it was handed...

Bosinney ventured: "It's the first spring day".

Irene echoed softly: "Yes -- the first spring day".

"Spring!" said June: "there isn't a breath of air!" No one replied.

The fish was taken away, a fine fresh sole from Dover. And Bilson brought champagne, a bottle swathed around the neck with white.

Soames said: "You'll find it dry".

Cutlets were handed, each pink frilled about the legs. They were refused bu June, and silence fell.

Soames said: "You'd better take a cutlet, June; there's nothing coming".

But June again refused, so they were borne away. And then Irene asked: "Phil, have you heard my blackbird?".

Bosinney answered: "Rather -- he's got a hunting-song. As I came round I heard him in the square".

"He's such a darling!"

"Salad, sir?" Spring chicken was removed. But Soames was speaking: "The asparagus is very poor. Bosinney, glass of Sherry with your sweet? June, you're drinking nothing!"

Passive-voice forms are bulkier than common-voice forms and where there is no real reason to use passives active verb-forms are generally preferable. But passive forms are often quite effective. Sometimes what would be the subject of an active form seems unimportant or is only vaguely identifiable.

The old house has been torn down. We've been locked out again.

Sometimes what would be the subject of an active form is important, and is included in the clause, but for valid rhetorical reasons seems better as complement of agency than as subject.

The college was founded by the local committee. He'll always be dominated by his wife.

When the passive is an infinitive or gerund its use sometimes eliminates awkward subject constructions.

Everyone likes to be liked.

We resented being treated like that.

In impersonal written styles, the passive often serves as a way of keeping the writer out of sight. Examples are numerous. Here are some of them.

The names of such musicians have been mentioned elsewhere.

The importance of observations in this field has always been emphasised.

Passive constructions are often referred to as stilted, indirect and cold, impersonal and evasive. To give its critics their due, the passive, when in large doses, can indeed be ponderous stuffy and bulkier than the active. With all this it is used over and over by best stylists in prose open to none of the preceding objections. This is because it can be most important and useful to shift the centre of communication creating, according to circumstances, varied and effective sentences.

Students will find it helpful to remember that from the point of view of adequate translation into Ukrainian the English passive forms may be subdivided into three groups:

a) those translated by means of active verbal forms with indefinite personal or impersonal sentences, e. g.:

1. You are wanted on the phone.	1. Вас просять до телефону.
2. Were you told to wait for him?	2. Вам сказали почекати на нього?
3. She is regarded as the best student`.	3. Її вважають найкращою студенткою.
4. We are not allowed to use a dictionary.	4. Нам не дозволяють користуватися словником.
5. Не is not to be disturbed on any account.	5. He треба його кожний раз турбувати.
6. I was sure the students would be called in.	6. Я був певний, що студентів запросять.
7. Whose fault that was will never be known.	7. Ніколи не буде відомо, чия це була помилка.
8. He is said to have helped you very much.	8. Кажуть, що він вам дуже допоміг.
1. You are wanted on the phone.	1. On vous demande au telephone.
2. Were you told to wait for him?	2. Vous a-t-on dit de l'attendre?
3. We are not allowed to use a dictionary.	3. On ne nous permet pas de nous servir d'un dictionaire.
4. He is not to be disturbed on any account.	4. Il ne faut le deranger sous aucun pretexte.
5. I was sure the students would be called in.	5 J'etais sur qu'on ferait venir les etudiants.
6. How far he was responsible will never be known.	6. On ne saura jamais quelle fut la part de sa responsabilite.

b) those translated by using the verb-forms of the middle voice, e. g.:

1. This letter can be pronounced in two ways.	1. Ця буква вимовляється двояко.
Cf. French: Cette lettre se prononce de deux facons.
2. This quality is not often met with.	2. Таке не часто зустрічається.
Cf. French: Cette qualite se rencontre rarement

c) those translated by the corresponding passive form of the verb, e. g.:

Nothing was said. Нічого не було сказано.

d) patterns with the passive verb-forms which can be translated only by the corresponding active ones because of the lexical character of the verb and restrictions in the use of the past participle of some verbs in our mother tongue, e. g.:

To sum up in brief, the frequency value of passive constructions in English is due to a number of reasons. Emphasis will be laid on the following:

a) There are, in fact, no means in English to avoid the indication of the doer of the action in active constructions.

In other languages there are special uses of the active without indicating the agent. Such are, for instance, indefinite-personal sentences in Russian and Ukrainian with the predicate-verb in the 3rd person plural but without exact relevance to the doer of the action.

The indefinite pronoun one and occasionally the personal pronouns we, you and they, as well as the noun people, may be used in this meaning. But for some reason or other the use of such sentence-patterns seems to be restricted, and English instead often shows here a marked preference of passive constructions.

b) Variation in the use of different types of passive turns existing in English lends variety to speech. Although some of them are somewhat restricted in use, they still contribute to the frequency value of the passive in general.

Substitutes for Passive

As in other languages passive meaning can find its expression not only in the paradigmatic forms of the verb. There are other techniques in English which can serve this purpose. There is always a selective way in the distribution of various means adapted to this purpose in each case. The peripheral elements of the passive field in Modern English are:

"get-passive".

verb-phrases with the semi-copulative verbs become, stand, rest, and go, e. g.:

I have become sunburnt.

He stands prepared to dispute it.

We rest assured.

They go armed.

3) active verb-forms with reflexive pronouns, e. g.:

it sees itself; it manifests itself, it displays itself, etc. ¹ 4) syntactic patterns of causative meaning, e. g.: He had his photo taken. I went it done. See the letters delivered.