V. VERB QUALITIES - UW-Parkside: Help for Personal Homepages

V. VERB QUALITIES
–Subjunctive Mood
–Using Modals
–Progressive Aspect
–Perfect Aspect
–Passive Voice
–The Use and Abuse of the Passive
Our first chapter dealt at some length with verbs, but mercy dictated that some details were
left out at that point. Verbs have mood, aspect, and voice, intimidating terms which you
should be familiar with as a language expert. In other languages, variations in these are
expressed by inflections on the verb, Languages which express most meanings by inflecting
their nouns and verbs are called synthetic languages, as opposed to languages which do
not use inflections, which are called analytic languages. Like most language, English lies
somewhere in between these extremes, but it seems to be becoming more analytic in its old
age.
Subjunctive Mood
Our distant ancestors, the speakers of Proto-Indo-European, seem to have enjoyed nothing
more that inflecting their verbs and nouns for one shade of meaning or another. Verbs could
be inflected for mood, indicating various degrees of factuality, probability, or desirability.
Modern English has abandoned most such inflections.
111
English uses auxiliary verbs to express variations in meaning which older languages
in our family expressed by inflections; the use of will to express the future is only one
example. Verb mood in English has been reduced to the imperative, the subjunctive,
and the indicative, with the shades of meaning once expressed by mood now
conveyed through modal auxiliaries.
English has only three moods left: the indicative mood for expressing statements and
questions, the imperative mood for expressing commands, and the subjunctive mood for
expressing possibility. In practice, the indicative mood can be used to express everything
and usually is. The imperative can be expressed using the base form of the verb (be, go) as
in imperative sentences, but we often phrase our commands with polite circumlocutions,
including the use of modals like must and should. The hypothetical or desired conditions
traditionally expressed with the subjunctive are usually expressed with plain indicative
declarative or interrogative sentences or by using modal auxiliaries. In effect the indicative is
the default mood in English, and we don’t need to specify it. If a sentence isn’t labeled as
imperative or subjunctive in mood, the assumption is that it is indicative.

Exercise 5.01--The Flexible Indicative--The following sentences are
all in the indicative mood. Identify those which nevertheless
express commands or hypotheticals of one sort or another:
1) You must go now, or my parents will catch us.
2) If they should come home before you go, all hell will break
loose.
3) You can't leave your stuff on the floor like that.
4) Will you please pick it up?
5) Of course I wish you could stay.
6) By the way, I may have some news for you later this week.
7) I might be going to the doctor.
8) How would you feel about getting married?
9) I only meant we should be thinking about it.
10) You should hurry.
Like the imperative, the present subjunctive is expressed in modern English by using
the base form of the verb, particularly in place of the third person singular.
English has retained a few vestiges of the subjunctive mood, mainly for use in formal prose.
The present subjunctive is expressed by using the base form of the verb. When the base
form is used without a subject, however, it is always interpreted as imperative in mood. In
addition, with the exception of be, normal English verbs (i.e., indicatives) already use the
base form for the present plural and the first and second person present singular. The
subjunctive use of the base form, therefore, is distinctive only in the third person singular of
most regular verbs. Sentences (1) through (3) below show that the subjunctive can be used
in that-clauses triggered by a verb (1), an adjective (2), or noun (3) respectively:
(1) They proposed that he go to China.
(2) It is advisable that he go to China.
(3) The general gave an order that the sentry fire without asking for a
password.
Sentence (4) illustrates the subjunctive's use in certain old-fashioned formulae. Conditional
clauses like those in sentences (5) and (6) can also use the subjunctive:
(4) Be that as it may, I am going.
(5) If that be the case, I am a dead man.
(6) We must take care lest we be seen as arrogant.
In modern English, the past subjunctive is pretty much confined to uses of were when
one would otherwise use was.
Regular English verbs have no distinctive subjunctive form in the past tense. For the verb
be, the past subjective is formed by using the plural were where one would normally find the
singular was–e.g., for the first or third person past singular. This subjunctive is used in
conditional or hypothetical clauses or in clauses which follow certain verbs, like wish in
sentence (10):
(8) If I were a rich man, I wouldn't have to sing this song.
(9) He acted as though he were offended.
(10) I wish this class were over.
112

Exercise 5.02: Subjunctive or Not?--Identify the subjunctives or
possible subjunctives in the following sentences. Watch out for
modals and imperatives:
1) If I were king of the forest, not queen, not duke, not
prince, my regal robes of the forest would be satin,not cotton,
not chintz.
2) Be my love, for no one else can end this yearning.
3) They stopped talking lest she hear them.
4) She asked that I be the one to tell him.
5) If I might be so bold, you have been snoring.
6) I wish I were a pair of ragged claws.
7) It seems inevitable that he fail in this.
8) I told him that she would leave.
9) It is her plan that they wait till dawn.
10) Light my fire.
Using Modals
While the use of the subjunctive in English has been declining, the modal auxiliary verbs
have flourished. The shades of meaning conveyed by subjunctive mood–or by moods no
longer present in English like optative–are generally expressed in modern English through
the use of modal auxiliaries. These come with subtle shades of meaning whose exact
boundaries are not always agreed on.
Many of the meanings one might associate with the subjunctive are handled in English
by the modal auxiliary pairs may/might and can/could, though when to use which is a
matter of some debate.
Despite the best efforts of handbooks to keep them apart, can/could and may/might overlap
considerably in meaning as actually used by Standard English speakers, Such differences
as one can point to often seem to have more to do with politeness and formality than with
primary meanings. People who go around “correcting” others on the use of these modals
are rather obnoxious.
113
The modal can carries the primary sense of "be able to," and can and could are often used in
just that sense:
(1) I can't take it any more.
(2) I couldn’t take it any more.
(3) I couldn't love you more.
Notice that in sentence (2) could seems to be the past tense of the can in sentence (1), but in
sentence (3) it does not seem to refer to past time. That’s the kind of problem that keeps
linguists from simply declaring can as present and can’t as past.
By extension, can and could are used for all kinds of questions of possibility and as a polite
way of seeking permission:
(5) Can I have this dance?
(6) Could I take you dinner sometime?
The implication of these sentences is that the speaker does not wish to presume that there is

even a possibility of the implied request being granted. This humble use of can is an old and
well-attested one, but it annoys those who would like the language to make more rigorous
distinctions in word use. Those who feel this way would prescribe the use of may or might for
all cases where permission is sought. They can often be used interchangeably, without
regard to tense considerations, though in general the past forms of modals (could, might)
appear somewhat more deferential:
(5) May I have this dance?
(6) Might I have this dance?
When it comes to questions, you might want to use may/might only in highly formal
situations--or when asking an English teacher to dance. Notice, though, that they can also be
used where the issue is simply possibility–thus infringing on the turf of can/could:
(7) I may have offended her.
(8) I might drop by your place later.
114
By most accounts, a Standard English sentence can have only one modal at a time. Various
non-standard dialects, however, use might could and some other double modals, and use of
these double modals may be coming more widespread. It is probably still safest to avoid
them in formal writing. In informal speech, of course, one hears the triple form mightacoulda-woulda,
with the “-a” endings representing the abbreviated have form ‘ve, which is
also responsible for the very non-standard forms might of, could of, or would of.
Some overlap in uses also occurs between the pairs will/would and shall/should.
At one time school texts insisted that shall should be used for the future with the first person
singular and plural and will in all other cases:
(1) I shall see you soon.
(2) We shall have a drink or two before we go.
(3) He will lose his teeth that way.
(4) They will want to forget this game.
This usage survives, especially in British English, but Standard American English uses will in
all such sentences, reserving shall for mandative uses, where it is much more forceful than
either will or should--closer, in fact, to must:
(5) Meetings shall be held on alternate Fridays.
Would is used in hypothetical futures, including polite requests, and is sometimes combined
in that use with like:
(6) I wouldn't do that if I were you.
(7) Would you get me a beer while you're up?
(8) Would you like to sit down?.
Should is generally used interchangeably with ought to as a less forceful form of must and
the mandative shall, one that does not assume compliance:
(9) The committee shall meet every week.
(10) The committee must meet every week.
(11) The committee ought to meet every week.
(12) The committee should meet every week.
One can also find should as a rather formal future in conditional clauses, as in sentence (13):
(13) If George should come, tell him I’d like to speak with him.

In addition to its obvious uses in conveying required or necessary actions, must can
also be used to suggest that a statement is a necessary conclusion under the
circumstances.
Like may/might, the modal must seems rather formal for everyday use, especially in
questions. Most of us would regard sentence (1) as affected and would use a sentence like
(2) or (3) in in its place:
(1) Must I go?
(2) Should I go?
(3) Do I have to go?
In American English, at least, the quasi-modal have to, as in sentence (3), is gaining ground
on must. If one treats the modals as having tense, as some grammarians do, must is always
present, since there is no normal past equivalent for must. Sentence (4) below shows how it
can be combined with other auxiliaries to deal with such problems, but sentence (5) is an
easier solution.
(4) I must be crazy, and I must have been crazy.
(5) I have to be crazy, and I had to be crazy.
115
Do is often counted as a modal, since as an auxiliary it occupies a modal position, is
followed by a base form verb, and cannot occur with other modals. As such do is
supplied by DO-INSERTION to bear the tense in interrogatives, negative sentences,
and where emphasis is required. It can also serve as a “pro-verb” and as a normal
main verb.
Like the modal verbs, DO is followed by a base form and cannot co-occur (as a modal) with
other verbs, which is why we prefer to treat it as a modal auxiliary rather than a primary
auxiliary. The uses of do we have seen so far are cases in which do has been supplied by
DO-INSERTION to serve as a tense-bearing operator. The most common such use is in the
various question forms, where a tense element has been stranded by INVERSION, whether it
is a yes/no question, a tag question, or a WH-question:
(1) Did you drive to Milwaukee?
(2) He drives to Milwaukee, doesn’t he?
(3) Why does he drive to Milwaukee?
In the absence of other auxiliaries, do also serves as a tense-bearing operator in negative
sentences and in making strong assertions (the emphatic do).
(4) He did not drive to Milwaukee.
(5) He did drive there, I tell you!
Unlike the other modals–and like the primary auxiliaries be and have–do is regularly found as
the only verb in a sentence. Even then it has some unusual qualities. Much of the time it is
standing for an entire antecedent predicate, rather as pronouns can stand for nouns or noun
phrases. Notice that if there is more than just a verb in the predicate, do can replace the
entire predicate:
(6) Martha walked, and George did so too.
(7) Martha ate a kumquat, but George did not.
Although it may look as though do is serving as the main verb of its clause in such cases, this
pro-verb use is really another example of do serving as a tense-bearer in place of other
auxiliaries. If the original predicate includes an auxiliary, that verb can serve as the pro-verb,

though it may also be combined with “do so”:
(8) Martha could sing well, and George could too.
(9) Martha could sing well, and George could do so too.
(10) Martha is singing now, and George is too
(11) Martha has sung before, and George has done so too.
As usual, be behaves like an auxiliary even when a main verb and the behavior of have as
main verb is unpredictable, with either sentence (13) or sentence (14) being acceptable:
(12) Martha is a soprano, and George is too.
(13) Martha has a lovely voice, and George has too.
(14) Martha has a lovely voice, and George does too.
As a “pro-verb” or a product of DO-INSERTION, do brings no meaning of its own to the
sentence. Every once in a while, however, it is a normal main verb conveying an action one
is expected to deduce from the verbal context, as in the following sentences:
(15) Alphonse does my hair himself.
(16) Do it to me, baby, one more time.
(17) Debby does Dallas.
As a pro-verb or main verb, do itself requires Do-INSERTION for yes/no questions, the
emphatic do, and negative sentences:
(18) Did you do this?
(19) Daddy did do time, .
(20) I didn’t do anything.
EXERCISE 5.03: Uses of DO–Say whether each use of do is a main verb,
a pro-verb, or supplied by DO-insertion for an interrogative, a
negative sentence, or emphasis.
1) A little chocolate now and then doesn’t hurt.
2) Daddy does the dishes
3) Does your mother know that you’re out?
4) Don’t climb a tree to look for fish.
5) I do believe in life on Mars.
6) My baby does me good.
7) No man manages his affairs as well as a tree does.
8) She told me to stop and I did.
9) What if some random stranger really does want to give you
money?
10) Why do birds suddenly appear?
Dare and need were also used as modals in older forms of English, but these days we
more commonly use expressions like dare to, need to, have to, ought to. Like be
going to, have to, and used to. Such expressions are sometimes called quasi-modals
or semi-modals. Such expressions are part of a larger group called quasi-auxiliaries
and thus part of an even larger group called catenative verbs.
Other traditional modals are need, dare, and ought to:
(1) Need you go?
(2) Dare you ask such a question?
116

(3) Ought you to do so?
One might think that ought to could be interpreted as a verb followed by an infinitive
expression–you ought to do this, etc–but it is clearly in the modal position, as one can see
from its inability to co-exist with other modals–e.g., we cannot say may ought to or will ought
to.
117
Dare and need are seldom found these days and are generally replaced with dare to and
need to, which we have already encountered as alternatives to must. Unlike ought to, dare to
and need to are not full modals but quasi-modals (also called semi-modals). They can
appear with other modals:
(4) He will dare to speak the truth.
(5) He will need to shave that beard.
Another quasi-modal expressing obligation is have to:
(6) I have to drive to Milwaukee.
(7) I may have to drive to Milwaukee.
Like most modals and quasi-modals, have to can be used to express future time. More
explicitly linked to the future is the quasi-modal be going to. In informal American English,
this is probably used more frequently than will to form a kind of future “tense,” even though it
can co-occur with true modals, possibly even will.
(8) I am going to drive to Milwaukee tonight.
(9) I may be going to drive to Milwaukee tomorrow.
(10) ?I will be going to go to Milwaukee tomorrow.
A final prominent quasi-modal is used to. This cannot be used to express the future, as its
principal use is to imply that an action was habitual in the past. Like ought to, it does not
occur along with other modals, but unlike ought to it is rarely classed as a true modal:
(11) I used to drive to Milwaukee all the time.
One basis for this distinction is that the first word in ought to can move in INVERSION,
though it sounds rather formal:
(12) Ought I to worry about this?
(13) I ought to take steps to deal with this, oughtn’t I?
(14) Why ought I to do this?
Used to, on the other hand requires DO-INSERTION, always in the past tense:
(15) Did you used to worry about this?
(16) You used to deal with this, didn’t you?
(17) Why did you used to act like that?
In traditional grammar, one can interpret expressions like used to as involving catenative
verbs, verbs which characteristically take infinitive or gerund phrases as their object. English
has a great many such verbs, some of which are used this way enough to count as at least
quasi-auxiliaries. This is a more general term than quasi-modal because some quasiauxiliaries
appear in place of be and have as auxiliaries. Only those catenative verbs which
seem to take the place of auxiliaries are considered quasi-auxiliaries. Here are some others:
(18) We were allowed to go.
(19) We attempted to escape.
(20) Tom avoided dancing with Martha.
(21) Martha enjoyed dancing with Edgar.

(22) I forgot to go to the bank.
(23) I hate going to the bank, but I hate to forget stuff, too.
(24) You start forgetting stuff, and you start to lose it.
(25) I want to tell you I love you.
EXERCISE 5.04: Modals--Identify any modal auxiliaries or quasi-modal
constructions in the following sentences. How do they affect the
meaning of the main verb?
1) I shall return.
2) I should have been a pair of ragged claws.
3) I have to go to the symphony tonight.
4) I must have been mistaken.
5) I am going to kill that guy one of these days.
6) I have known him for many years.
7) I can see clearly now.
8) I would like to take you out tonight.
9) I may be giving you a ring later.
10) I could not love you more than today I do.
11) I might have known he would betray me.
12) I used to talk to him on MySpace.
13) I was going to tell you eventually.
14) I need to write myself a note.
15) I will try again tomorrow.
Progressive Aspect
English inflects its verbs only for the past and present tense, and it forms its “future” tense by
using the modal auxiliary will. One often encounters references to additional tenses, the
“present progressive,” “the past perfect,” and so on. These “tenses” actually combine a true
tense (present or past) with an aspect of the verb, though we need not be quite that
technical in our discussion here. The progressive and perfect aspects are formed by
combining verb forms we encountered in our earlier discussion of interrogative sentence
form, the primary auxiliaries and verb participles.
Progressive aspect of a verb is signalled by be as a primary auxiliary, followed by the
present participle (or ing-participle) of the next verb.
We have one more use for the ing-participle of verbs; when preceded by a form of be
(including the past participle been), the ing-participle signals progressive aspect
If the main tense of the sentence is present, then we have the present progressive; if it is
past, we have the past progressive. Some students have difficulty in understanding that
you can have a past progressive formed by a present participle. Try to remember that
whether it is present or past depends on the tense of the first auxiliary verb--was drinking in
sentence (2) is past progressive even though it has a "present" participle:
(1) The ship is heading into a storm. [PRESENT
PROGRESSIVE]
118

(2) The captain was drinking heavily last night. [PAST PROGRESSIVE]
(3) It will be sinking soon. [FUTURE
PROGRESSIVE?]
119
EXERCISE 5.05: More Ing-Words: Are the highlighted -ing words
participles used to form the progressive, participles used as
premodifiers, participles heading a postmodifying participial phrase,
participles used as nouns (gerunds), or not participles at all?
1) Annabelle was all too willing.
2) Baby needs some bling-bling.
3) The bells are ringing for me and my gal.
4) The drum solo left a ringing in my ears.
5) Tom was being rejected by Annabelle.
6) Ginger thinks of herself as a caring individual.
7) Harry has been walking in the forest.
8) He gave her an enormous ring to make it up to her.
9) His lecture was interruped by a ringing cell-phone.
10) His bride, smiling in her blue-silk dress, had looked
radiant.
11) Hot food was served by smiling faces.
12) I am just giving her a back rub.
13) John had always wanted to die in the bull-ring.
14) Many are smiling as they read that story.
15) Sitting on the fence is his specialty.
16) Smiling and belly-laughing are so relaxing.
17) Susan was smiling more and more.
18) Tony had been paying him hush money.
19) Walking to school this morning, I talked to myself.
20) We live in exciting times.
The progressive gets its name because it suggests that a given action is or was in “progress”
at the time we are talking about. We use the progressive more than we may realize.
Standard English users rarely use the simple present tense for things which are happening
as they speak. In theory, both of these sentences refer to something which is happening right
now:
(4) I walk to school.
(5) I am walking to school.
In practice, sentence (4) almost always refers to a habitual action--something which is true
these days--which we may or may not be engaged in at the moment. Sentence (5) can refer
to a habitual action, too, but is more apt to be used if we are, in fact, walking to school at the
moment we say it, perhaps while chatting on our cell phone. To make matters a bit more
confusing, either the simple present or the present progressive can be used to refer to a past
action; this is called the narrative present: if we were telling an anecdotes about something
that happened to us on the way to school yesterday, we might use either of the following:
(6) So I walk to school, and this guy starts following me.
(7) So I am walking to school, and this guy starts following me.

Remember that time and tense are not always the same thing. Either the simple present or
present progressive can be used to refer to a future action by adding an appropriate
adverbial:
(8) I've had it with parking here. Next semester I walk to school.
(9) I am walking to school tomorrow, unless you'd like to give me a ride.
One might even be able to use the past progressive in a sentence like (9). Certainly, a past
progressive sentence like (10) below is almost always a present-time equivalent to to the
alternatives which follow:
(10) I was wondering if you could bring me a beer.
(11) I am wondering if you will bring me a beer.
(12) I want you to bring me a beer.
(13) Bring me a beer!
There are some verbs and adjectives which seldom or never take the progressive. Such
verbs and adjectives are called stative because they characteristically represent states of
being. The opposite of stative is dynamic, a category in which most verbs and adjectives
are found but a name one need not learn. Adjectives can also be classified as dynamic or
stative, another way in which they resemble verbs. Explicit attention to the progressive is
mainly important for non-native speakers and speakers of non-standard dialects which delete
the progressive be along with the linking verb be. The former may produce sentences like
sentence (14), misusing the progressive with a stative verb, and the latter may produce
sentences like sentence (15), neither of which is acceptable Standard English:
(13) ?? I am believing you now.
(14) * The boss going out of his mind.
In the sentence diagramed below, "getting" is a linking verb equivalent to "becoming," and
"interesting" is used as an adjective. We have two verbs in this sentence, and the VP headed
by "getting" is shown as a complement within the VP headed by "is." The way trees with
auxiliary verbs are drawn has changed some through the years, but this is one widely
accepted way. Sentences with more auxiliaries can have verbs which take verb phrases as
their complement inside of verb phrases which are themselves complements of a verb, and
so on.
.
120

You might notice that the auxiliary is has been moved under the tense/modal element in the
diagram above. This seems rather unnecessary in straight-forward declarative sentences,
and is less important than treating such verbs as verbs which take full VPs as their
complements. We do it here to show how one can account for the behavior of tensed
auxiliaries in interrogative sentences:
(15) Samson was talking with Delilah ==> Was Samson talking with Delilah?
(16) He is bringing down the house ==> Is he bringing down the house?
121
If they are tensed verbs, the primary auxiliaries can move in front of the subject to serve as
indicators of interrogative sentence form; if the tense/modal element is already filled, as by a
modal verb, then the primary auxiliaries do not move. Here, for example, is what some would
call a future progressive:
(17) The storm will be coming soobn ==> Will the storm be coming soon?
In informal English, the catenative verb keep is often used as a quasi-auxiliary forming a
keep-progressive, in which the ing-participle follows keep instead of be:
(18) He was walking.
(19) He kept walking.
(20) He is being silly.
(21) He keeps being silly.
The keep-progressive is actually a useful construction, reinforcing the continuous nature of
the action, a sense of the progressive no longer necessarily conveyed in sentences (18) and
(20) but very clear in sentences (19) and (21). Even so, keep-progressives are probably not
safe for use in informal prose. Even more insistent, equally useful, and even less acceptable
in formal prose would be the use of keep on to form a kind of progressive.
(22) Old Man River, he keeps on rolling along.

Perfect Aspect
122
As a main verb, have indicates possession of some thing or quality. As an auxiliary, it
combines with the past participle to form a structure called the perfect. Like the
progressive, the perfect is technically a verb aspect but often referred to as a tense.
Unlike the ing-participle, the en-participle (past participle) does not confuse us by serving as
a gerund. It makes up for this by being involved in both perfect aspect and passive voice.
The perfect aspect has a form of have as a primary auxiliary, followed by a past participle.
The have is the real key to recognizing the perfect. When have is the only verb, it is the main
verb and (loosely) denotes possession. If have is part of a string of verbs, then it is an
auxiliary and it is signally the perfect.
The tense of a perfect verb phrase is actually determined by the auxiliary in front of it,
assuming there is no modal to confuse matters. Sentence (1) below is in the present
perfect because have is a present tense form, even though we are talking about things from
the past. The past perfect equivalent would have the past tense had as in sentence (2).
(1) I have often walked down this street before.
(2) I had often walked down this street before.
Once again, we see that the English tense-aspect system does not have a very exact
relationship with real time. The perfect implies that the action was already completed
(“perfected”) at the time specified by the tense. The present perfect in sentence (1) means
that as of the time we are speaking we had already at some previous time walked down this
street. The past perfect in sentence (2) would suggest that at some point in the past
(specified by the context) we had already finished frequent walks down that street.
As with the past progressive, the notion of a present perfect formed by a past participle is
confusing for some students. Try to remember that a predicate has only one tense/modal
element. Another potent source of confusion in using the perfect arises from our habit of
contractive have to ‘ve. When we do this after modal auxiliaries, the resulting sounds can
lose contact with the original auxilary verb, so that students wind up writing sentences like (3)
and (4):
(3) *I mighta known that would happen.
(4) *I could of told you that.
EXERCISE 5.06: Perfect–Give the tense and aspect (if any) of the
following sentences:
1) What a fine mess you’ve made of things, Ollie!
2) Tom had a notion that shoes are black.
3) I had never seen such gall.
4) I was trapped in my house with a killer rabbit.
5) Gwendolyn has been given a lollipop.
6) Tom had lust in his heart.
7) That poor man had given his love to too many women.
8) Tom had lusted after Gwendolyn.
9) Arthur has a canker sore.
10) Alfred is in love with Edith.

123
We can sometimes become confused as to whether have (or be) is acting as a main
verb or an auxiliary verb in a given sentence.
One source of much confusion are adverbs inserted between the auxiliary and its participle,
as in have often walked. The adverbs most frequently found in this position are adverbs of
frequency, which we have already identified as occupying the specifier postion in a VP. When
the verb they precede is the main verb, we can fail to notice that the verb ahead of it is an
auxiliary. Notice that place adverbials like down the street and time adverbials like before are
much more comfortable after the verb, though for emphasis one could move them to the
beginning of the sentence.
(1) I had walked down that street.
(2) ?Down that street I had walked.
(3) I had walked down that street before.
(4) ??Before, I had walked down that street.
Although it can move around like other adverbs, often is much more comfortable preceding a
verb, though it follows the main verb be without any problem unless lodged against a time
adverbial, and can also be moved to the front of the sentence:
(5) I had walked down that street often.
(6) ?I had walked down that street before often.
(7) Often I had walked down that street before.
EXERCISE 5.07: What Will Hamlet Have? Is the highlighted form of
have being used as the main verb or as a primary auxiliary helping to
form the perfect?
1) A beast that wants discourse of reason would have mourned
longer.
2) The cat will mew and dog will have his day.
3) God has given you one face, and you make yourselves another.
4) I had seen this hot love on the wing.
5) I had my father's signet in my purse.
6) I have that within which passeth show.
7) Let us impart what we have seen to-night unto young Hamlet.
8) Revenge should have no bounds.
9) This skull has lain in the earth three and twenty years.
10) What wouldst thou have, Laertes?
As with the progressive and passive, we can diagram the perfect by showing "have" as a
verb taking the rest of the predicate as its complement:

124
Although the two forms of aspect might seem opposed to each other, the perfect
progressive is not that unusual a combination, perhaps because modern English rather
prefers to use the progressive for the current time, rather than the simple present. The
auxiliary perfect marker “have” always comes first, so that the form of “be” used will always be
“been”
(10) It has been raining hard. [PRESENT PERFECT PROGRESSIVE]
(11) It had been raining hard. [PAST PERFECT PROGRESSIVE]
(12) It will have been raining hard. [FUTURE PERFECT PROGRESSIVE?]
In diagraming such combinations, one simply multiplies cases in which an auxiliary verb takes
the remaining parts of the verb phrase as a verb phrase predicate:
There is a reason for trying to remember obscure tense-aspect combinations like past
progressive passive and the like. One owes the reader the simple courtesy of keeping one's
tenses consistent with each other. If one starts in the simple present, then one uses it with the
present perfect, the present progressive, the present passive, and so on. If one starts in the
simple past tense, one sticks to the past perfect, the past progressive, the past perfect, and
so on. This is called the sequence of tenses, and it does not come easily to all writers. The
perfect aspect is a particular problem, because perfects refer to completed actions, so that
even the present perfect can seem like it should go with past tenses.
Another source of problems in sequence of tenses is starting out in the narrative present,
which we often use for telling anecdotes or for discussing things we have read, and then
drifting into the more natural past tense. Such problems don't normally happen right away, so
the illustrations below may seem a bit exaggerated:
(13) ?? A man walks into a bar with a life-sized hot dog and says, "A beer for
me and one for my friend here." The bartender looked at the hot dog and said,
"We don't serve food here."
(14) ?? Raising Kumquats for Fun and Profit by E. J. Diddle is a good book
which gives many valuable hints for the novice kumquat-raiser. It claimed that
kumquats are a golden fruit.

Passive Voice
When have is the primary auxiliary, it is always followed by a past participle and always
signals the perfect aspect. Be, unfortunately, is less well-behaved. When followed by a
present participle it signals progressive aspect, but when followed by a past participle, it
signals passive voice. It is all too easy for students to confuse passive constructions with
either the progressive or the perfect.
The grammatical concept of voice refers to the relationship between the subject and a
verb. The default voice in English is the active voice. For cases in which a nominal
which would normally be a complement of the verb is used as the subject, English
uses the passive voice. The nominal which would normally serve as a subject is
optionally found in a prepositional phrase headed with by.
Some languages inflect verbs for voice, the relationship between the verb and the nominal
expressions around it. A language which takes this seriously can have up to five kinds of
voice, which should make you feel better about the difficulties posed by the English passive.
English does not inflect for voice, using the auxiliary system instead, and it recognizes only
two voices, active voice and passive voice. Almost all English sentences are in the active
voice, and in analysis we can assume a sentence is in active voice unless specified
otherwise. In theory, the active voice is for cases in which the subject is an active agent
performing the verb. In practice, however, English uses the active voice for sentences in
which the agent is neither present nor implied. In sentence (1) below, the subject is the
agent, but if we take away the agent, the instrumental can serve as the subject, as in
sentence (2):
(1) George opened the door with a key.
(2) The key opened the door.
With a verb like open, we can take away the instrument and have what would otherwise be
the direct object serve as the subject:
(3) The door opened.
Some verbs regularly take non-agents as subjects. In sentence (4), for example, Henry is
clearly a victim rather than the agent of his own suffering:
(4) Henry suffered terribly at the hands of the police.
Some languages have a special middle voice for such cases, but English uses only the
active.
In English, passive voice is used for cases in which an agent is present or implied but a
nominal which would normally be an object of the verb serves instead as its subject. If the
agent is present, it is placed in a prepositional phrase headed by the preposition by:
(5) The door was opened by George.
(6) The door was opened with a key by George.
The prepositional phrase with by gives us another signal that we have a passive construction.
Passive sentences in which the agent is simply implied can be a little harder to recognize:
(7) The door was opened.
(8) The door was opened with a key.
In learning to recognize the passive, it is best to rely on its structure, be + past participle,
125

ather than on meaning, if only because English allows non-agents to serve as subjects of
active sentences. One sometimes hears it referred to a tense, but the tense of a passive
sentence is determined by the tense of the first auxiliary verb. English sentences are
assumed to be in the active voice unless we specify otherwise. An active voice sentence,
therefore, will be referred to as simply present tense or past tense, while a passive sentence
would be termed present passive, past passive, or even future passive:
(9) Henry is surrounded by fools. [PRESENT PASSIVE]
(10) We were robbed by the referees. [PAST PASSIVE]
(11) A protest will be filed with the league. [“FUTURE” PASSIVE]
For writers, it is a handy exercise to practice turning passive sentences into their active
equivalents and vice versa, but linguists seem to have stopped talking about PASSIVE
movements. For one thing, the kind of phrase structure analysis we have been using with
progressive and perfect aspect works perfectly well to show the passive, without our
becoming involved with trace labels and so on:
If the form of be used to form the passive is the first auxiliary verb, and thus tensed, it can
move in front of the subject to form a yes/no question:
(12) We were robbed ==> Were we robbed?
(13) He was lying ==> Was he lying?
It can also be subject to the forms of INVERSION in tag questions and WH-questions:
(14) We were robbed, weren’t we?
(15) What was he lying about?
For an active sentence to be turned into a passive one, it must have a transitive verb–e.g., it
must have a direct object. In simple transitive sentences, one simply moves the direct object
into the subject slot and the subject into a by-phrase and makes the main verb a past
participle preceded by a form of be:
(16) Amber abhorred Alison ==> Alison was abhorred by Amber.
(17) Basil bought the baked goods ==> The baked goods were bought by
Basil.
(18) Carol cancelled the cooking class ==> The cooking class was cancelled
by Carol.
(19) Dave dropped a diaper ==> The diaper was dropped by Dave.
126

What looks like the object of a preposition can be moved into the subject slot when the verb is
interpreted as a plural verb:
(20) Ellen egged on Edgar ==> Edgar was egged on by Ellen.
With ditransitive (dative) verbs, the indirect object and direct object can both be moved into
the subject position. When the direct object becomes the subject, the indirect object may be
placed in a prepositional phrase headed by to.
(21) Frank forwarded my friend the file ==>My friend was forwarded the file by
Frank ==>The file was forwarded to Frank by my friend.
Moving back and forth between the active and passive is more complicated when the passive
is combined with perfect and/or progressive aspect. Even though being is a present participle
as part of the progressive, it still counts as a form of be in forming the passive, so that if it is
followed by a past participle one has the progressive passive. Sentence (22) is past
progressive passive, and sentence (23) is present progressive passive, with the tense of the
first auxiliary being what counts:
(22) We were being robbed by the referees.
(23) Your order is being processed.
In the same way, the been of a perfect construction can still serve as the form of be marking
the passive in perfect passive sentences like these:
(18) We have been robbed again.
(19) My order had been mislaid.
Over the years, formal English has come to allow even longer strings of auxiliary verbs,
ungainly creatures like the present perfect progressive passive, the past perfect
progressive passive, and the future perfect progressive passive:
(20) He has been being neglected for years.
(21) He had been being neglected for years.
(22) He will have been being neglected for years.
127

EXERCISE 5.08: Active to Passive--In transforming the following
active sentences into passive, be careful not to lose track of the
tense and aspect of the original:
1) Freddy had fixed the fence.
2) Greg was getting some gravy.
3) Helen will have hurt Harvey badly.
4) Iris isn’t ignoring the island.
5) Jack has just joined the Jacobins.
6) Kevin can’t have killed that kangaroo.
7) Laura is leaving Larry.
8) Maureen has been making the meatloaf.
9) Nate may be disappointing his nurse.
10) Ollie must have been ogling Olga.
11) Peter purchased Paula a pretty pickle.
12) Quincy was quietly giving his aunty a quince.
13) Robert had rarely bought Rachel roses.
14) Sally smiled at my sister.
15) Ted is ticking off the teacher.
16) Did Ulalume undervalue undies?
17) Will Vanna sell Victor her violin?
18) Was Walt washing his walking shoes?
19) Have you yanked Yanni’s pipes
20) Should Zelda zoom her camera?
BE is not the only over-worked verb in English. GET also has multiple uses, one of
which is as a quasi-auxiliary forming the passive in place of be.
There is an alternative form of the passive, in which a form of get is followed by a past
participle (en-participle):
(1) We got robbed by the referees.
This get-passive is one of the most common quasi-auxiliary constructions in English, but it
still sounds a bit colloquial and should be avoided in formal writing. As with the
kept-progessive, the quasi-auxiliary get cannot participate in INVERSION, so that questions
must be formed with DO-INSERTION. Sentences (2) and (4) below are acceptable, but
sentence (3) is not:
(2) Were we robbed by the referees?
(3) *Got we robbed by the referees?
(4) Did we get robbed by the referees?
Recognizing the get-passive is complicated by other informal uses of get as a catenative verb
followed by infinitives or gerunds:
(5) We got drinking Martinis.
(6) We got to see the parade.
In sentence (5), got is the equivalent of began, while in sentence (6) it is the equivalent of
were allowed to, and this is only a sample of its possible meanings. After be and have, get
may be the hardest-working verb in the language.
128

EXERCISE 5.09: Passive and Active--What verb forms do we have in the
following sentences? If active, make it passive; if passive, make it
active, supplying a subject if necessary:
1) I am called Iris by my friends.
2) Greg decorated the den.
3) I was knocked unconscious.
4) Henry gave Megan a pair of earrings.
5) Henry was given some socks by Megan.
6) This car is already sold to my sister.
7) I have never seen such idiocy.
8) It was a given that we would go for it.
9) He was driven to succeed.
10) These boots were made for walking.
The Use and Abuse of the Passive
The passive voice has a bad name in writing for a variety of reasons, but there are
cases in which it is better, or at least advisable, to use it.
Writers are often told to avoid the passive voice. One objection is that it introduces the
relatively puny (though hard-working) verb be--that is, sentence (1) seems more forceful than
either sentence (2) or sentence (3):
(1) The referees robbed us.
(2) We were robbed by the referees.
(3) We were robbed.
One might note that this objection applies as well to be as a main verb, the general rule being
that strong and specific verbs make for better prose.
A more serious problem with the passive is that it allows us to say something happened
without saying who did it, eliminating the subject of the equivalent active sentence.
Sometimes this simply loses information; sometimes it is evasive prose. To say only that we
were robbed, for example, expresses our sense of grievance without having the guts to come
out and say that we mean the referees. The absence of overt agents is particularly common
in bureaucratic prose (both government and business), where it allows a total evasion of
individual responsibility, leading to committee minutes full of It was noted that, it has been
reported that, it was decided that and the like. If forced to take minutes for a committee, you
may find yourself forced to follow that style. To preserve your linguistic integrity, it is best to
keep a second set of minutes recording actual events, so that the official minutes would have
sentence (4) but your second set of books would have sentence (5):
(4) It was decided to change “very quickly” to “quickly” in the third paragraph.
(5) George insisted that we change “very quickly” to “quickly” in the third
paragraph even though it meant retyping the whole page, and he carried on about it
so long that we gave up and gave in.
When confronted with excess passives, convert them back to active sentences, preserving
tense and aspect as best one can. This requires deciding what kind of object (direct object,
indirect object, object of a preposition/plural verb) the current subject would be in an active
sentence equivalent. It may require supplying a subject, if only someone or something.
(6) We were being robbed by the referees ==>The referees were robbing us.
129

(7) Your order is being processed ==> Someone is processing your order.
EXERCISE 5.10: Passive to Active
1) The dinner was prepared by Marcel
2) The cake was beautifully decorated.
3) The bride was dumped at the altar.
4) Many things can be seen in New York.
5) The bodies will be dumped in the river.
6) My aunt may be visited by the police.
7) Marcel had been dumped by the bride.
8) The cake had been poisoned.
9) The ushers have been bribed by Marcel.
10) The reception is being boycotted by the bride’s family.
11) The DJ is being tested for drugs by the police.
12) The guests were being frisked for guns.
13) The bride’s dress was stepped on by a flower girl.
14) Why was the best man killed?
15) Has the wedding been staked out by the police?
When, then, should one use the passive? It is always appropriate to use the passive when
one sincerely does not know the agent. If someone breaks into our house, for example, the
sentence We were robbed is perfectly OK, without adding "by someone" to make it clear that
we don't know who did it. It is also appropriate to use the passive for a clearer transition; if
you've been talking about "us" for several sentences, either We were robbed or We were
robbed by the referees avoids shifting the focus. Passive constructions are not automatically
bad prose, and even the best writers use them.
Even when the use of the passive is deadening, one needs to follow the rule of "When in
Rome, do as Romans do." In particular, remember that the modern university is just another
bureaucracy, and that academic writing is bureaucratic writing. The use of the first-person "I"
is taboo in many forms of academic writing. This will often force one to use the passive (and
other awkward structures)--e.g., "The subjects were asked." Hold your nose and comply.
EXERCISE 5.11: Tense, Aspect, and Voice–give the tense (unless
modal) of each of these sentences, plus the aspect (if any) and voice
(if passive):
1) Anton is aching with amorous anxiety.
2) Baldric was barred from the barber shop for life.
3) Can Calvin come out and play catch?
4) Did Dan ever have a dog?
5) Emily and Ernie were given eleven dollars each, weren’t
they?
6) Fannie has fallen on hard times.
7) George gave Gigi an expensive gem.
8) Has Hazel been hugging Hank?
9) I will just be ignored again, I guess.
10) Just in time, Justine is being joined by Jody.
130

11) Karen is knocked up.
12) Last night Larry was lusting after Lucy.
13) Mabel must have made up with Mike.
14) Nobody has been named to the position.
15) Olga will slowly open her eyes.
16) Pavla is proud of her piano prowess.
17) Quincy had quietly quivered with pleasure.
18) Rose has often been roped into racing.
19) So many speakers are silenced by the authorities.
20) Ted has always tried his best.
21) Uncle Henry had usually been snoring by this time.
22) Very few vessels had been verified as safe.
23) Will Walter have been walking the whole time?
24) You will always be dear to me.
Now that we have covered these various possibilities, we can summarize how to identify the
tense, aspect, and voice of a clause. If a clause has only one verb, that verb will be either in
the present tense or the past tense, there will be no aspect, and the voice will be active.
If a clause has two verbs, it all depends on the first verb. If the first verb is a modal, there is
no aspect, the voice will be active, and there will be no tense unless the modal is will and one
chooses to call that future tense. If the first verb is a form of have, the second should be a
past participle (even if it looks like a past tense), and the tense depends on the tense of have,
and the clause is in perfect aspect and active voice. If the first verb is a form of be, the tense
depends on the tense of be; if the second verb is a present participle, the clause is in perfect
aspect and active voice, but if the second verb is a past participle, the clause has no aspect
and is in passive voice.
131
If a clause has three or more verbs, just take them one by one. The tense, if any, still
depends on the first verb in the sequence, which should be either a modal or a form of be.
The perfect aspect always comes next, so if the first or second verb in the sequence is a form
of have, it should be followed by a past participle, and the clause will have perfect aspect. The
progressive aspect is next; if a form of be (even been or be itself) is followed by a present
participle, the clause has progressive aspect. The passive is always the last item signalled. If
the last verb (the main verb, therefore) is a past participle and the preceding verb in the
sequence is any form of be (including been, be, and being), then the clause is in passive
voice; otherwise, it is active.
EXERCISE 5.12: Tense, Aspect, and Voice Again–give the tense of each
of these sentences, plus the aspect (if any) and voice (if passive):
1) Emma has a scar on her right hip
2) He lived in a decayed mansion.
3) The dress is lying on the floor.
4) My friends call me Iris.
5) George was caught by Martha.
6) Martha is sharpening a knife.
7) Charity had lost her scruples.
8) Edgar was losing his as well.
9) Henry is outraged by MTV.

10) President Carter was attacked by a rabid rabbit.
11) George had been cheating on Martha.
12) Gwendolyn was sometimes accused of faking it.
13) Albert is being vilified in the media.
14) His mother had been frightened by a duck.
15) They’d been being given bribes by the gang.
16) Kukla is dating Fran.
17) The porridge has been eaten.
18) My aunt was being eaten by a python.
19) The python suffered severe indigestion.
20) Fortunately, I had brought some Maalox with me.
Checklist
In this section, we have talked mainly about declarative sentences. Can you still
distinguish them from imperative, interrogative, and exclamative (exclamatory) sentences?
Can you convert between declarative sentences and their equivalent interrogative forms? Can
you identify the heads, characteristic specifiers, and characteristic complements of a VP, an
NP, an AdjP, an AdvP, a PP, and an IP? Can you diagram them in phrase structure trees?
Can you say whether a noun phrase (or nominal) is functioning in a sentence as
subject, direct object, subject complement, adjunct adverbial, vocative, indirect object, or
object complement? Can you show that you recognize the phrases as structures by identifying
the complete subject of a sentence? Can you recognize subject complements and say
whether they are predicate adjectives, predicate adverbials, or predicate nominatives?
There are four open classes of words–nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs. Can you
identify them in a sentence and defend your identifications by reference to meaning, sentence
function, and possible inflections? Can you identify the parts of a verb? Can you say whether
the verb of a sentence is transitive, intransiitive, or linking? Among transitive verbs can you
recognize ditransitive (dative) and complex transitive verbs? Can you identify modal auxiliary
and primary auxiliary verbs? Can you recognize progressive and perfect aspect of verbs?
Can you recognize active and passive voice in verbs and convert sentences between
them without losing tense and aspect?
Can you distinguish between common nouns and proper nouns, mass nouns and count
nouns? Can you identify the comparison forms of adjectives and adverbs? Can you tell when
a word is acting as a preposition as opposed to an adverb or subordinating conjunction? Can
you tell whether a participle in a noun phrase is acting as a modifier or a gerund?
Can you recognize articles, demonstratives, personal pronouns, indefinite pronouns,
cardinal and ordinal numbers, quantifiers and multipliers–both as determiners and as standalone
pronouns? Can you recognize intensifying adverbs and distinguish them from adjectives
and adjunct adverbials?
WHEN IN DOUBT, MEMORIZE: When have is a primary auxiliary, it is helping to form the perfect
aspect. When an -ing participle (present participle) is part of a verb, it is helping to form the
progressive aspect. You can't have a perfect aspect without the have or progressive aspect
without the -ing
132