The Category of Voice

Date: 2015-10-07; view: 562.

§ 203. The category of voice is the system of two-member opposetnes (loves — is loved, loving — being loved, to love — to be loved, has loved — has been loved, etc.) which show wheth­er the action is represented as issuing from its subject (the active voice) or as experienced by its object (the passive voice).

This may be shown graphically as follows:

the subject of the action

Active voice Action

John loves.

the object of the action

Passive voice Action

John is loved.

§ 204. Voice is one of those categories which show the close connection between language and speech (Cf. case, § 82). A voice opposeme is a unit of the language system, but the essential difference between its members is in their combinability in speech. The 'active voice' member has oblig­atory connections with subject words and optional ones with object words. The 'passive voice' member, on the con­trary, forms obligatory combinations with object words and optional ones with subject words.

Cf. He loves (her).

She is loved (by him).

I want John to read (the letter).

I want the letter to be read (by John).

The category of voice also shows the links between mor­phology and syntax. Being a morphological category, voice often manifests syntactical relations. The voice opposites of finites indicate whether the subject of the sentence denotes' the doer or the recipient of the action.

Cf. She asked ... and She was asked.

§ 205. With regard to the category of voice verbs divide into those that have voice opposites and those which have not. The second subclass comprises subjective verbs and some objective verbs denoting actions of weak dynamic force (in which the meaning of 'action' is hardly felt) like belong, become ('be suitable'), befit, befall, cost, fail, lack, last, mis­give, own, possess, resemble, etc.

Still, when comparing the subjective verb stands with the two voice opposites writes — is written, we see that stands resembles the 'active voice' member of the opposeme by its synthetic form (write-s, stand-s) and by its regular connection with the subject word. Cf. He stands and writes (not is written).

Therefore subjective verbs, can be treated as united by the oblique (lexico-grammatical, potential) meaning of 'active voice' (see § 44).

§ 206. The content of all voice opposemes is the same: two particular meanings of 'active' and 'passive' voice united by the general meaning of 'voice'. All the other mean­ings found in both members of the opposeme are irrelevant within the opposeme.

The forms of voice opposemes seem to differ considerably. In the opposeme ask — am asked the 'active' member has a zero grammatical morpheme and the 'passive' member has a complicated positive morpheme/-am... -t/. In asks — is asked both members have positive grammatical morphemes /-s/ and/-iz ... -t/. In will ask — will be asked the forms of the grammatical morphemes are still more complicated. But this variety of form can be generalized if we exclude every­thing that expresses other meanings than those of 'voice'. Then the 'active' member can be regarded as unmarked and the 'passive' member as marked by the combination of one of the words of the lexeme be used as a grammatical word-morpheme and the grammatical morpheme of participle II, in formulaic representation be + -en (Cf. to write — to be written, writing — being written).

§ 207. One of the most difficult problems connected with the category of voice is the problem of participle II, the most essential part of all 'passive voice' grammemes. The fact is that participle II has a 'passive,' meaning not only when used with the word-morpheme be, but also when used alone. Thus, participle I writing seems to have two 'passive' opposites: being written and written.

Participle II has also a 'perfect' meaning, not only when used with the word-morpheme have (have written, having written) but when employed alone, too. Thus, the participle fading seems to have two 'perfect' opposites, having faded and faded.

E. g. The train moved ... — setting East — going — going—gone! (Galsworthy), where gone is used as the 'perfect' opposite of going.

Owing to the combination of the two meanings ('passive' and 'perfect') written cannot be regarded as the 'passive' opposite of writing which has no 'perfect' meaning. As we know, the members of an opposeme distinguish only the par­ticular meanings of the category they represent. Consequenty, the meanings of participle II are not grammatical meanings. They are not lexical either, since they do not belong to the stem of the lexeme. So research is needed to establish the nature of these meanings.

The 'perfect' meaning of participle II is felt in termi-native verbs, and the 'passive' meaning in objective verbs.

§ 208. Participle II may have left-hand connections with link-verbs.

E.g. The young woman's face became illumined by a smile. (Galsworthy). / always took it for granted that when one got т а r r i e d, one was married for good. (Iles).

The combination of words thus formed is often homo­nymous with a 'passive voice' verb, as in His duty is ful­filled.

The group is fulfilled cannot be treated as the passive voice opposite of fulfils since

1. It does not convey the idea of action, but that of state, the result of an action.

2. The sentence corresponds rather to He has fulfilled his duty than to He fulfils his duty, as the perfective meaning of participle II is particularly prominent.

§ 209. Some linguists are against this interpretation. According to L. S. Barkhudarov and D. A. Shteling, the com­bination be + participle II should in all cases be treated as a 'passive voice' form on the ground that participle II is, first and foremost, a verb, the idea of state not being incident to this structure, but resulting from the lexical meaning of the verb and the context it occurs in.

Likewise, G. N. Vorontsova maintains that the passive form expresses either an action in its development or an action as an accomplished fact. In both cases we deal with the passive voice.

However, this theory cannot explain the absence of an active equivalent to As my work is f i n i s h e d, I am free to go.

As shown by A. I. Smirnitsky, The table is made of wood has no corresponding parallel with an active meaning.

It is also not clear why other link-verbs may form combi­nations with participle II and the most frequent link-verb be cannot.

Cf. to seeт forgotten, to look forgotten, to be forgotten.

Examples like I was concealed and motionless (Wells), where participle II is coordinated with an adjective, prove its combinability with the link-verb be.

§ 210. The opposite extreme is to regard the combination of various link-verbs with participle II as analytical forms of the passive voice. G. N. Vorontsova objects to Curme's idea of become as a 'passive' auxiliary, but her own insistence on get as such an auxiliary is not much more justified. The verb influence cannot have two (or more) 'passive voice' opposites (be influenced, get influenced, become influenced). These "opposites" must differ either lexically or grammati­cally. In the first case get and become are not word-morphemes. In the second case there must be several 'passive voices'. In our opinion the first is true. Become and get always retain some of their lexical meaning. Get usually introduces a pecu­liar sense of an activity or achievement on the part of the object of the action (Cf. He w a s appointed to the post and He g о t appointed to the post).

§ 211. Opinions differ as to the voice system of Modern English. Though most linguists, apparently, recognize only two voices in Modern English — the active voice and the passive voice, some speak also of the reflexive voice (or neuter-reflexive) expressed with the help of the sernan­tically weakened self-pronouns, as in He cut himself while shaving.

Besides the three voices mentioned above, B. A. Ilyish ⁵ finds two more voices in Modern English — 'the reciprocal' voice expressed with the help of each other, one another and 'the neuter' ('middle') voice as seen in The door opened, The numbers would not add, The words formed in his head, The college was filling up, etc.

These theories do not carry much conviction:

1) In cases like He washed himself it is not the verb that is reflexive but the pronoun himself used as a direct object.

2) Washe'd and himself are words belonging to different lexemes. They have different lexical and grammatical mean­ings.

3) If we regard washed himself as an analytical word, it is necessary to admit that the verb has the categories of gender (washed himself — washed herself), person — non-person (washed himself — washed itself), that the categories of number and person are expressed twice in the word washes himself, etc.

4) Similar objections can be raised against regarding washed each other, washed one another as analytical forms of the reciprocal voice. The difference between 'each other' and 'one another' would become a grammatical category of the verb.

5) A number of verbs express the 'reflexive' and 'recipro­cal' meanings without the corresponding pronouns.

E. g. He always washes in cold water. Kiss and b e friends.

6) Different meanings of open, add, etc. have already been treated (see § 200).