Passive Voice

“Las Vegas was beat out by Liverpool.”

Adverbs, Common English Blunders, Devolution toward Simpler, Passive Voice, Verbs

I heard this on a Travel Channel show about “extreme Christmas” celebrations.

Problems:
1. The verb “beat” is incorrect here.
2. The adverb “out” is unnecessary.

Explanation:
The statement is written in passive voice, albeit incorrectly. In particular, “beaten” — not “beat” — is the passive form of the verb “to beat”. (The statement in active voice would be “Liverpool beat Las Vegas.”)

I believe that the use of “beat” instead of “beaten” when the latter is appropriate represents

  • ignorance about passive voice, and
  • a laziness that favors shorter, fewer-syllable words over longer words.

The one-syllable “beat” is simpler than the two-syllable “beaten” to say, which is consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” hypothesis about American English. Throw in a common lack of understanding how sentences in the active voice are converted to sentences in the passive voice, and it’s no wonder that many English speakers choose “beat” (incorrectly) instead of “beaten” in a statement posed in the passive voice.

The other problem with the original statement is that the adverb “out” is unnecessary. Even in active voice — “Liverpool beat out Las Vegas.” — the adverb “out” is unnecessary. I have noticed a trend in American English (I can’t say whether the trend exists in other English-speaking countries.) to add one or more unnecessary adverbs after verbs, and this problematic statement contains yet another example of this trend.

Solution:
“Las Vegas was beaten by Liverpool.”

“Jon is suppose to present it.”

Common English Blunders, Devolution toward Simpler, Passive Voice, Verbs

I saw this in an instant message.

Problem:
The verb “suppose” is incorrect here.

Explanation:
The statement is written in abbreviated passive voice, albeit incorrectly. The subject of the sentence (Jon) is acted on by a verb, and we do not know who is supposing that Jon will “present it”. A statement in active voice must identify the person who is supposing that Jon will “present it”.

“Jane supposes that Jon will present it.” is an example of a statement in active voice. We get “Jon is supposed by Jane to present it.” when we rearrange the statement to put it into passive voice. Abbreviating this statement, we correctly get “Jon is supposed to present it.” in abbreviated passive voice.

In other words, “supposed” — not “suppose” — is the passive form of the verb “to suppose”.

I believe that the use of “suppose” instead of “supposed” when the latter is appropriate represents

  • ignorance about passive voice, and
  • a laziness that favors more easily pronounced words.

The word “suppose” is easier than the word “supposed” to say. Throw in a lack of understanding how sentences in the active voice are converted to sentences in the passive voice or abbreviated passive voice, and it’s no wonder that some English speakers choose “suppose” (incorrectly) instead of “supposed” in a statement made in the passive voice or abbreviated passive voice.

Solution:
“Jon is supposed to present it.”

“Can Hillary be beat?”

Common English Blunders, Devolution toward Simpler, Passive Voice, Verbs

I heard this while listening to a radio talk-show’s discussion of the former first lady’s race for the 2008 U.S. presidency.

Problem:
The verb “beat” is incorrect here.

Explanation:
The question is written in abbreviated passive voice, albeit incorrectly. The subject of the sentence (Hillary) is acted on by the verb, and we do not know who potentially is beating her. A question in active voice must identify the person who potentially will beat Hillary.

“Can Joe beat Hillary?” is an example of a question in active voice. We get “Can Hillary be beaten by Joe?” when we rearrange the question to put it into passive voice. Abbreviating this question, we correctly get “Can Hillary be beaten?” in abbreviated passive voice.

In other words, “beaten” — not “beat” — is the passive form of the verb “to beat”.

I believe that the use of “beat” instead of “beaten” when the latter is appropriate represents

  • ignorance about passive voice, and
  • a laziness that favors shorter, fewer-syllable words over longer words.

The one-syllable “beat” is easier than the two-syllable “beaten” to say. Throw in a common lack of understanding how sentences in the active voice are converted to sentences in the passive voice or abbreviated passive voice, and it’s no wonder that many English speakers choose “beat” (incorrectly) instead of “beaten” in a question posed in the passive voice or abbreviated passive voice.

Solution:
“Can Hillary be beaten?”