The cult of the active voice has an enduring influence in English grammar. From grade school onwards most everybody is taught that sentences in the active voice are the end-all and be-all of English, and that sentences in the passive voice should be avoided like the plague. Grammar teachers furiously drill into every pupil’s or student’s head that the sentence “Emilio hit Andres violently with a bat” is superior to “Andres was hit violently by Emilio with a bat” or “A bat was used by Emilio to violently hit Andres.” The active-voice has thus been elevated to icon status, rarely to be questioned or resisted.
When we get down to the real-life dynamics of language, however, we’ll discover that a totally active-voice narrative or exposition is neither a practical nor a desirable goal. Indeed, language that uses an unbroken train of active-voice sentences is in many ways the equivalent of speaking stridently at all times or of singing a song on a high note from start to finish. We all know how exhausting this can be for both the performer and the audience. One major function of the passive voice is, in fact, to leaven such verbal performances—to provide low-energy counterpoints to the high-energy semantic field created by active-voice sentences.
But an even more compelling reason for using passive-voice sentences is that they are at times the most natural and only logical choice in certain communication situations. To see how true this is, let’s go back to the example of the active-voice sentence we used above: “Emilio hit Andres violently with a bat.” Assume now that after you’ve said this, someone asks you to clarify it. If that person knows Andres better than he does Emilio, his question would most probably take this form: “What did you say happened to Andres?” Your answer, of course, wouldn’t be the active-voice “Emilio hit Andres violently with a bat,” which emphasizes not what happened to Andres but what Emilio did to him. It would be irrelevant and out of context. In fact, the most logical answer would be the passive-voice “Andres was hit violently by Emilio with a bat,” which rightly highlights what happened to Andres.
Then, if your interlocutor further asks, “What instrument did you say was used?”, would it be sensible for you to answer with the same active-voice sentence as before, “Emilio hit Andres violently with a bat”? Definitely not; that would make you sound very obtuse and strange indeed! The only logical and sensible answer would be another passive-voice sentence, “A bat was used by Emilio to violently hit Andres.”
So what does this tell us about how we should fashion our sentences? Well, it’s that we should write them or say them in the most logical, natural way possible—using the active voice if called for, but never hesitating to use the passive voice when logic and good sense demand it. Unless you are a student forcibly made by your English teacher to stick to the active voice on pain of failing in the subject, or perhaps a journalist with a standing order from your editors never to use the passive voice, the active voice should only be a secondary consideration in writing your sentences.
Much more important is to emphasize in your sentences what you want to emphasize or need to emphasize. The active voice certainly has its virtues, chief among them the way it reflects the usual way our thoughts form in our minds, but it need not be a straitjacket working against our natural instinct for clear, relevant, and forceful expression. The passive voice actually gives us both the latitude and the opportunity to focus on what we really need to focus on and to say exactly what we mean. Our prose and our speech will be squandering that latitude and opportunity by blindly and inflexibly deferring to the cult of the active voice.
This is a condensed version of the author’s 825-word essay that appeared in his book Give Your English the Winning Edge
, © 2009 by the Manila Times Publishing Corp. All rights reserved.Read this essay and listen to its voice recording in
The Manila Times:
In defense of the passive voiceThis essay, 2149th of the series, appears in the column “English Plain and Simple” by Jose A. Carillo in the Campus Press section of the May 4, 2023 digital edition of The Manila Times
, ©2023 by the Manila Times Publishing Corp. All rights reserved.(Next:
When even the passive voice won't suffice) May 11, 2023
Visit Jose Carillo’s English Forum, http://josecarilloforum.com. You can follow me on Facebook and Twitter and e-mail me at j8carillo@yahoo.com.
