To me, this is the crux of the biscuit. Passive voice is a tool that is very powerful when used properly. Using the passive can communicate to the savvy reader that there is sub-text, and that the sub-text is deliberately obscured. Draw your own conclusions. Granted, this is not the desired result in a news piece or legal document. But in business and politics…
Funnily, I used to minute meetings between the (UK) gov’t and private businesses. Subtext is everything – the people who need to know what really happened will figure it out, and should the minutes get leaked it won’t incriminate anyone. I was also told once that “meeting minutes should reflect not what people said, but what they would have said had they thought of it at the time.” Yes, the UK Civil Service really is like it’s portrayed in Yes, Minister.
In my opinion, this is changing to some degree. While I agree that the majority of papers are written in the passive voice, I’ve seen several that use a more active voice, actual use of pronouns, and such.
Minor hijack: there is no valid reason in English not to regularly split infinitives. The rule dates back to grammarians who believed that, since Latin infinitives couldn’t be split (a Latin infinitive is one word), neither could English infinitives. This is obviously wrong, and any teacher who tells you otherwise is a slave to history rather than logic.
Grammar teachers, in my experience, often fail to distinguish between rules and guidelines. One should always begin a sentence with a capital letter: that’s a rule. The passive voice is best avoided: that’s a guideline.
Even rules have exceptions. bell hooks mandates a lowercase “b” when she’s the subject of a sentence.
But avoiding the passive voice is a guideline. A good writer will use the passive voice judiciously and deliberately, neither eschewing it nor depending on it.
When I worked as a grammar tutor, I’d sometimes need to persuade freshman kids to forget what their high school English teachers had taught them. No, your thesis sentence doesn’t have to be in the first paragraph. No, your paper doesn’t need three supporting points. And no, passive voice isn’t verboten.
Daniel
President Bush received an award from a local elementary school class.
To me, this is an issue regarding the rules of the particular style by which you are attempting to write.
AP Style dictates active voice used as much as possible (see hometownboy’s post). True, sometimes you just can’t say something clearly without using passive voice, but IMHO, 99% of the time any sentence is more clear and understandable when written in active voice. Personally, I’m allergic to passive because it sounds as though the writer is trying to sound intelligent by using too many unncessary words. (I also have this thing about prepositional phrases when trying to write concisely.) From this comment, you should be able to tell that I’m trained as a journalist – I was not taught this in English classes either.
The OP is about a financial column for a monthly magazine. I’d suggest consulting the publication’s stylebook for guidance on the frequency of passive voice. If there isn’t one (but there should be!) defer to Strunk & White (“Elements of Style”) when in doubt.
All the other comments above about English papers and legal memoranda: completely irrelevant. The rules of Journalism (should be used in magazines and newspapers, among other forms of journalism) are NOT the same as the rules in English. Trust me – I majored in Journ. and minored in English. Concise, succinct, active-voice style made for problems in English classes. Expository, descriptive, passive voice writing made for trouble in Journalism classes.
Whining, “Why didn’t they teach me that in college?” is useless here if you only took Freshman comp. and maybe one other writing class. Take 20 different writing classes with two different schools of thought, then come back and whine. Then you’ll be as thoroughy confused as I was in college!
When I took a class on how to write clearly in college, we were taught exactly what has been mentioned: the grammatical subject of the sentence should match up exactly with the topical subject of the sentence. This was the most important rule, and everything else is second at best.
I’ve found this site to be incredibly helpful when writing papers for my college classes.
It delves into the active vs. passive voice here.
In summary: Passive voice is a no-no…
wait for it…
but…
The first description would seem to apply nicely to the OP’s situation.
I too have been dinged for using the passive voice in my papers. It seems to not only be discouraged, but completely unacceptable in college level writing.
Funny, but i would write “The committee has decided…”
This is not say that you are wrong - Fowler’s says that in British English, “collective nouns may be correctly followed by either a singular or a plural verb,” although apparently in American English “it is customary for a singular verb to be used with collective nouns.”
I know that, m’dear. I was joking for Miller’s sake.
Well, a certain author started a certain book with this sentence:
“It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife.”
. . . and her book turned out okay. Passive sentence construction is definitely useful when you are trying to convey a certain tone of irony or detachedness.
Passive voice is frowned upon (by whom?) in news copy, with one major exception: “A suspected bank robber was arrested today (by whom?).” If the actor is understood (the police/the FBI), you can skate by.
As an aside, we had a part time reporter working in the newsroom many years ago who could not avoid writing passive sentences. (Passive sentences were unavoidably written by her.) Yet, she had graduated with a degree in English, and was a substitute teacher! Try as we might, we could educate her on this point. (She could not be educated by us.)
Reminds me of this (although, I’m not sure if the Churchill attribution is correct):
Supposedly an editor had clumsily rearranged one of Churchill’s sentences to avoid ending it in a preposition, and the Prime Minister, very proud of his style, scribbled this note in reply: “This is the sort of English up with which I shall not put.”
Damn. That’s basically what I wrote. I have no idea what my thinking was influenced by when it was first written by me.
Good points, keen insights, but, people, aren’t we avoiding the real issue here?
What did Bush ever do to get an award from an elementary school class?
(By the way, I never end a sentence with a preposition unless I can’t think of anything else to end it with.)
That’s absolutely right.
And here’s a related joke: A freshman was lost on his first day at Princeton. He approached an upperclassman and said, “Hey man, do you know where the library is at?”
The upperclassman looked down his nose at the freshman and said, “My good fellow, here at Princeton we do not end a sentence with a preposition.”
The freshman thought about this for a moment, then said, “Okay. Do you know where the library is at, a**hole?”
I wish I could tell this in class and get away with it.The example I was always given…
If your dog is hit by a car, you say, “The dog was hit by a car.”
If YOU hit someone else’s dog, you say, “I ran over a dog.”
In the former, your dog is more important than the car. In the latter, not so much.
Well … I don’t speak American English; that “UK” in my “Location” field does not stand for “University of Kansas”. (In all honesty, though, I can’t claim any great level of consistency on this particular point.)
As to the passive voice (again), does it not come down to what (IIRC) stylisticians call the register? That is, the overall social context in which an utterance is made; the audience the speaker is aiming at, if you like. For some registers, the passive voice is permissible, even appropriate; for others (such as journalism) it’s not.
Na-uh. If I hit a dog, I’d be throwing passive voice all over the place. “The dog was run over,” or “uh, the dog had an encounter with a car that I was in.”
Breaking the rules is great for avoiding self-incrimination.
I did realize you were in the UK. In fact, despite my location, i don’t speak American English either. I was raised in Australia (despite rumours, we do speak English down there), and the OED and Fowler’s are my bibles when it comes to usage.
Brian Garner’s A Dictionary of Modern American Usage is a great book, though, and i highly recommend it to all English speakers, American or otherwise.
P.S. If you were a doctor, i might have thought that the UK stood for University of Kentucky 