Passivization

Middles
 Passivization
Passive sentences have specific passive morphology, i.e.
an auxiliary verb and the lexical verb in the past participle
form:
(1)a.The old lady was tricked into selling her house.
b. The suspect is being tailed.
c. They had never been seen.
d. He can’t have been invited too.
The auxiliary  tense, aspect, agreement with the subject
 Passivization
Q: What does the presence of passive morphology
involve?
A1: Passive verbs do not have an external argument any
more.
A2: Verbs that do not have an external argument cannot
give accusative case to their internal argument
(rememeber Burzio’s generalization).
 passive morphology makes the verb intransitive;
 passive verbs behave like unaccusatives. See next
example.
 Passivization
(2) a. *The old lady be tricked thief.
b. *The suspect is being tailed a spy.

trick and tail are transitive verbs. As such, they can

give accusative case to the internal argument, the direct
object
 when passivized, these verbs cannot have internal
arguments anymore due to the presence of passive
morphology.
 Passivization
Since passive verbs cannot support their internal
argument, the latter has to move to a position where it
can get case  the subject position.

(3) The old ladyi was tricked ti.

This type of movement is known as A-movement

(argument movement, movement from one argument
position to another).
 Passivization
Q: Under what condition can the internal argument (the
direct object) move to subject position in passive
sentences?
A: The internal argument can move if it occupies a
position adjacent to the verb:
(4) The minister told the president the truth.
The president was told the truth.
*The truth was told the president.
 The NP that is immediately adjacent to the verb: the
president.
 Passivization
Q: Why can the following sentences with prepositional
objects allow passivization?
(5) a. He didn’t account for the loss of money.
b. The loss of money wasn’t accounted for.
(6) a. The blackmailer alluded to the crime.
b. The crime was alluded to.
 the internal argument is not adjacent to the verb, the
P intervenes
 the internal argument can get accusative case from P
 Passivization
Prepositional passives have one property: the verb and the
P form an inseparable unit (consider the following
examples).
(7) a. He didn’t account entirely for the loss of money.
b. The blackmailer alluded angrily to the crime.
adverbs can break up the verb – preposition unit in the
active voice.
(8) a. *The loss of money wasn’t accounted entirely for.
b. *The crime was alluded angrily to.
 The verb – preposition unit cannot be broken by adverbs
if the verb has been passivized.
 Passivization
(9) a. He looked right at her.
b. He saw right to their needs.
 particles can break up the verb – preposition unit in
the active voice.
(10) a. *She was looked right at.
b. *Their needs were seen right to.
 The verb – preposition unit cannot be broken by
particles if the verb has been passivized.
 Passivization
Q: Do all prepositional verbs have a passive counterpart?
A: If the PP is not an argument of the verb, passivization
is not an option:

(11) a. He laughed in the room.

b. *The room was laughed in.
(12) a. He ran with his sister.
b. *His sister was run with.
 The domain of passivization
There are some restrictions on the passivization of
transitive verbs.

First, transitive verbs that denote states do not passivize,

i.e. have, possess, resemble, hold (in the sense of
contain). This is so because their direct object is not a
real Theme, i.e. an affected constituent.
 The domain of passivization

(13) a.*Seven cars were had by prime minister.

b.*A lot of knowledge was possessed by the
new Pope.
c.*John was resembled by his twin sister.
d.*A lof of water is held by that container.
e.*Confidence was lacked (by) John.
 The domain of passivization
Transitive verbs that take an expletive/idiomatic direct
object do not passivize either.

(14) a. John got it last time I tried to explain things to

him/*It was got (by John).
b. He blew it, I’m afraid/*It was blown (by him).

This restriction falls in line with the fact that idiomatic

Theme arguments are not referential and as such they
cannot refer to affected entities.
 The domain of passivization
Finally, it is also important that the referent of the Agent
argument be [+ Animate] for a passive sentence to be
well-formed.

(15) a. My car needs a wash.

*A wash is needed by my car.
b. The train left the station.
*The station was left by the train
 The by-phrase
The by-phrase in passives corresponds to the external
argument that has been suppressed as a result of the
presence of passive morphology.
Q: Does this mean that the Agent is absent in passive
sentences?
(18) a. The meeting was called to please the boss.
b. The man was released to avoid protests.
 the purpose clause (to …) has a null subject; the
antecedent of this null subject is the Agent.
 The by-phrase
(19) a. John was arrested on purpose.
b. The suspect was hit violently.
manner adverbials modify the Agent
A: The agent is implicit in passive sentences.
If the Agent is not mentioned, then
it is interpreted generically; it refers to a non-specific
individual

(20) Food is put in jars ..

 Passivization
the agent is familiar, its identification does not matter
in discourse:

(21) a. The suspect has been arrested.

b. I was accompanied to the station and helped to
board the train.
 The by-phrase
However, there are cases in which the omission of the
by-phrase makes a passive sentence ungrammatical, as
in (22), (a) and (b) quoted from Avram 1999.

(22) a. *This house was built.

b. *The bridge was designed.
c. *The film was produced.
d. *The turkey was cooked.
 The by-phrase

Q: What do all the passivized verbs in (22) have in

common?

A: Semantically, they are verbs that denote creation. We

can conclude that when such verbs are passivized, the
by-phrase must be mentioned.
 Get-passives
In addition to be-passives, English also features another
type of passive construction, the get-passive, which is
exemplified below:
(23) a. John was killed in yesterday’s accident.
b. John got killed in yesterday’s accident.
(24) a. The window was broken by my younger son.
b. I know how the window got broken.
(25) a. The cat was run over by a bus.
b. The cat got run over by a bus.
 Get-passives

There are differences bewteen the two types of passives,

which concern

(i) the status of be versus get,

(ii) semantic interpretation and compatibility with
certain verb classes.
 Get-passives
Be in passive sentences behaves like an auxiliary verb
(it inverts with the subject in interrogative sentences, it
is negated by not, it is used in tag questions). Get, on
the other hand, shows different behavior. Consider the
pairs of sentences below.
(26) a. Was John robbed yesterday?/*Got John robbed
yesterday?
b. She was not paid at all/*She got not paid at all.
c. The child was kidnapped, wasn’t he?/*The
child got kidnapped, gotn’t he?
 Get-passives
Get passives are interpreted as eventive whereas be
passives focus on the result of the event denoted by the
verb.
The connection between eventive interpretation and get
passives explains why this kind of passive is
ungrammatical if the verb has a stative interpretation.
This basically means that psychological verbs as well as
verbs that denote mental perception will be
ungrammatical in get passives (though not in be
passives).
 Get-passives

(27) a. Sue was admired/hated/feared by her brother.

b. *Sue got admired/hated/feared by her brother.

(28) a. The dean was considered a fool.

b. *The dean got considered a fool.
 Adjectival Passives
There is a set of properties that differentiate verbal
passives (which we have already discussed) and
adjectival passives (presentation and examples based on
Emonds 2005).
i)Verbal passives may denote an ongoing activity (29).
Adjectival passives refer to completed activities (30):
(29) The door is being painted. verbal
(30) The door looked painted. adjectival
 Adjectival passives
This is why the copulative verbs that are not compatible
with the ‘completed sense’ cannot occur in adjectival
passives:

(31) a. *Many polluted cities remain avoided during

the summer.
b. *New York seems left in the tourist season.
 Adjectival passives
ii) Selection by different copulative verb classes: all
verbs that select an AP can form an adjectival
passive. Here is a short list of such verbs in English:
act, appear, be, become, look, remain, seem,
smell, sound.

Verbal passives are grammatical with verbs such as

be and get (which may also select an AP)
 Adjectival passives
iii) Degree words can modify adjectival passives, but
not verbal passives.
(32) The garden seemed too overplanted.
The region does not seem very inhabited.
How spotted with food did these clothes look?
(33) *New York is more avoided by tourists than other
cities.
*That prison is not very escaped these days.
 Adjectival passives
iv) The adjectival prefix un- modifies only
adjectival passives.

(34) The work seemed unknown/unrewarded.

These books should remain
unsold/unfinished.
(35) *That work was unfollowed by others.
*These books should get unhanded to
customers.
 Adjectival passives
v) Only verbal passives have external arguments.
(36) The meeting was started on time by Susan (to
please the host).
Our workers are better paid (intentionally
by the new boss).
(37) Most of our furniture is still unmoved (*by the
company).
Our workers remain better paid
(*intentionally).
 Middles
Consider the pairs of sentences below:

(25) a. A maid irons his shirts.

b. His shirts iron easily.
(26) a. The tax payer bribed the bureaucrats.
b. Bureaucrats bribe easily.
The examples in (25b) and (26b) are known as middle
sentences.
 Middles
Schoorlemmer & Ackema (2005) propose that the
following set of properties characterize middle
sentences:
(i)The external argument in the non-middle counterpart
is not an argument in the middle sentence;
(ii)The subject of the middle sentences carries the
semantic role of the direct object in the non-middle
counterpart;
(iii) Middle sentences are generic.
 Middles
The following presentation and examples, based on
Schoorlemmer & Ackema, focuses on properties of
middle sentences as well as on restrictions on middle
formation.
Middle predicates are stative.
Middle sentences rely on stative (non-eventive)
predicates.
(27) Bureaucrats bribe easily.
(28) *Bureaucrats are bribing easily nowadays.
 Middles
Middle sentences have a modal reading that can be
paraphrased as ‘anyone could Verb Adverb’.
(29) This book reads easily, so I can read it too.
This egg peels easily, so I can peel it too.

Middle sentences contain an adverbial modifier.

(30) These toys assemble rapidly.
*These toys assemble.
 Middles
However, it is possible under certain circumstances for
middles to do without adverbial modification.
(i)when the sentence contains a modal verb
(31) This meat may cut, but you never know.

(ii)when we want to say that anyone can do the action

that the verb refers to
(32) This dress buttons.
 Middles
Middle sentences are not compatible with by-phrases.

Middle
(33) Such texts do not translate easily (*by
professional translators).
Passive
(34) Such texts are usually translated by a professional
translator.
 Middles
Fagan (1992) proposes that middle formation is subject
to an aspectual constraint: (transitive) activities and
accomplishment predicates represent the input to middle
sentences.
(35) This pipe smokes nicely.
A Steinway piano plays easily.
Bob-Ross style pictures paint easily.
Sturdy clear plastic boxes assemble in
seconds.
 Middles
(36) *A red-winged blackbird recognizes easily.
*Such high summits do not reach easily.
(37) *That answer knows easily.
*Such a nice person loves only too easily.
Note, however, that Fagan’s constraint does not hold
across the board because achievement predicates
may also constitute input to middle formation.
(38) Glass breaks easily.
High explosives detonate easily.
 Middles

It has also been proposed that the grammatical subject

in middle sentences must be also subject to the
Afectedness Constraint: the grammatical subject in a
middle sentence must be affected by the action denoted
by the middle verb.
 Middles
Consider the contrast below:
(39) Defenseless countries invade easily (said by one
aggressor to another).
Defenseless cities destroy easily (said by
one bomber to another).
(40) *Simple answers know easily (said by one
student to another).
*Security stuff recognizes easily (said by
one thief to another).
 Middles
Note, again, that the Afectedness Constraint may
sometimes break down.

(41) Greek translates easily.

One last constraint that applies to middle formation

concerns the subject in middle sentences, The Agentivity
Condition: the logical subject in a middle sentence must
be an Agent.
 Middles
(42) Bureaucrats bribe easily.
That book reads well.
Greek does not translate easily.

(43) *The Eiffel tower sees easily.

*The answer knows easily.
*Spies don’t recognize easily.
 Middles
Q: How do we know that the logical subject is an
Agent?
A: There are tests for agentivity.
(i)Agents are compatible with agentive adverbials such
as intentionally, on purpose;
(ii)Agents are compatible with paraphrases like ‘what X
did to y’.
 Middles
(44) The mafia boss intentionally bribed the
bureaucrats.
What Mary did was read a good book.
What Harry did was translate a Greek test.
(45) #The tourist intentionally saw the Eiffel
tower.
#What most students did was know the
answer. #James Bond intentionally recognized
the other spy.