Future indefinite

I / You / He / She / It / We / You / They’ll write a letter.

The letter’ll be written by me / you / him etc.

In the negative:

The letter isn’t written / is not written …

The letter wasn’t written / was not written …

The letter won’t written / ’ll not be written / letter will not be written …

In the system of time correlation:

The letter has not yet been written.

The letter had already been written.

The letter will have been written by 3 p.m.

The passive forms are most commonly used when it is more important, more convenient to stress the thing done, result achieved etc., than the actual doer of it, or when the doer is unknown. This fact makes them very appropriate in the register of a scientific discourse: For a resolution of R hertz, data must be collected for 1 / R second. We need to know both the communicative choices offered by grammar, and also the structural grammatical choices through which communication must be challenged.

The expression of this categorial meaning is determined by the lexical-syntactic properties of a notional verb, transitive verbs can become passivised, the object of the predicate thus becoming the subject of a new utterance: e.g. These letters will be mailed tomorrow. Last year 5,000 cars were produced. The house was built in 1840. Purchases are paid in cash.

The categorial meaning of voice is compatible with the expression of other categorial meaning, but remains the central one in the marked form of the category of voice: The bridge is being repaired (aspect and voice.) That joke has been laughed at for many years now (time correlation and voice). Your diploma will be discussed next week (future time of action and voice).

The choice of the passive voice is sometimes idiomatically biased, i.e. the use is probable in terms of grammar, and not very natural in terms of usage. Cf: John likes Mary. Mary is liked by John. John likes swimming. Swimming is liked by John.

The impersonal predicate with that-clause is formal and less idiomatic than the personal passive predicate with the infinitive: It is said that he’s coming. He is said to come / to be coming.

With regard to the category of voice verbs divide into those that have passive voice forms and those which have not. The second subclass comprises subjective verbs (which do not take an object), statal and relational verbs such as consist, belong, become (be suitable), befit, befall, cost, fail, lack, last, misgive, own, possess, resemble etc.

The contents of all voice opposemes is the same: two particular meanings of non-passive and passive voice forms are 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 non-passive member has a zero grammatical morpheme while the passive member has a complicated positive morpheme -æ m... -t. In asks:: is asked both members have positive grammatical morphemes -s and -iz…-t. In will ask:: will be asked the grammatical morphemes are still more complicated. But this variety of form can be generalized if we ignore everything that expresses other meanings than those of voice. Then the non-passive member can be regarded as unmarked or weak and thepassive member as marked and strong:

e.g. to write:: to be written;

writing:: being written.

As to the voice system of Modern English, opinions differ. Most linguists (A.A. Smirnitsky, L.S.Barkhudarov, D.A.Steling, G.N. Vorontsova,) recognize two voices in English, while M.Y. Bloch admits of one, speaking of non-passive and passive forms of the verb forming a category of voice. Some linguists speak of the reflexive voice (V.N. Zhigadlo, I.P. Ivanova, L.L. Iofik) or neuter-reflexive (V.L.Kaushanskaya et alia) expressed with the help of the semantically weakened self-pronoun: e.g. He cut himself while shaving.

Besides the three voices mentioned above, B.A. Ilyish speaks of two more voices in Modern English: the reciprocal voice (e.g. they kissed each other or they kissed one another) and the neuter as seen in: e.g. The door opened. The numbers would not add. The college was filling up.

Moreover, some linguists speak of the so-called medial voice: e.g. The knife cuts well. The skirt wears well.

These theories do not carry much conviction.

1. In sentences like He washed himself or He shaved himself it is not the verb that is reflexive but the pronoun himself used as a direct object to the verb.

2. washed or shaved and himself belong to different lexemes, the latter not being part of the grammatical verb-form.

3. In case we regard washed or shaved as an analytical word-form, it is necessary to admit that the verb has the category 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.

4. Similar objections could be raised against regarding the forms they kissed each other or they kissed one another as analytical forms of the reciprocal voice.

5. A number of verbs such as kiss, embrace, hug, wash, shave express reflexive and reciprocal meanings without the corresponding pronouns. In the sentence They kissed tenderly (They kissed each other tenderly) each other is deleted from the structure of the sentence, the meaning of the sentence remaining unchanged.

6. The verb in all the cases has not undergone any changes.

7. As regards the so-called medial or middle voice, it is represented in the English language by means of sentence such as: e.g. The shirt washes well. The book sells well. The knife cuts well.

The meaning can be revealed through transformations:

e.g. The shirt washes well. The shirt is made of cloth that is easy to wash.

The book sells well. They sell dozens of books of this name. / The book is in great demand.

The knife cuts well. The knife is sharp.

The verbs in these sentences do not denote the action or some kind of activity. They denote properties of the thing denoted by the nouns used as subjects. They are not actional verbs. Hence there is no change of the verb form.

In the Russian language there are also such verbs: кипеть – кипятить – кипятиться.

In conclusion one could say that there is one binary opposition that shows the direction of the process as regards the participants of the situation in the syntactic construction. It is reasonable to speak about different lexical-grammatical meaning of the non-passive forms of the verb, not any particular voices.

The English language has more passive forms constructions than the Russian language. In the English language it is not only the transitive verbs that build passive forms.

e.g. I gave Mary a book. A book was given to Mary.

It is also an indirect object that can become the subject of a passive construction: e.g. I gave Mary a book. Mary was given a book. It is not the transitive character of the verb that matters, but having an object. In this respect one can classify the verbs which can be passivized into several groups:

- transitive verbs proper: a transitive verb + a direct object (to see something, to do something);

- ditransitive verb: a transitive verb + an indirect object + a direct object (to give somebody something);

- ditransitive verb with a prepositional object: a transitive verb + a direct object + a prepositional object (to explain something to somebody);

- verbs that take a prepositional object only (to look at sth./sb., after sb.; to speak to sb., about sth.;, to take care of sth./sb.).

References:

1. Александрова, О.В. Современный английский язык: морфология и синтаксис. = Modern English Grammar: Morphology and Syntax: учебное пособие для студентов лингвистических вузов и фак-тов иностр. языков / О.В. Александрова, Т.А. Комова. – М.: ИЦ Академия, 2007. – С. 111-112.

2. Бархударов, Л.С. Очерки по морфологии современного английского языка / Л.С. Бархударов. – М.: Высшая школа, 1975. – С. 108-113.

3. Блох, М.Я. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка: учебник / М.Я. Блох. – 4-е изд., испр. – М.: Высшая школа, 2003. – С. 191-200.

4. Гуревич, В.В. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка. Сравнительная типология английского и русского языков: учебное пособие / В.В. Гуревич. – 3-е изд., испр. – М.: Флинта, Наука, 2004. – С. 25-30.

5. Жигадло, В.Н. Современный английский язык: Теоретический курс грамматики: учебное пособие / В.Н. Жигадло, И.П. Иванова, Л.Л. Иофик. – М.: ИЛИЯ, 1956. – С. 126-147.

6. Ильиш, Б.А. Строй современного английского языка (теоретический курс): учебное пособие / Б.А. Ильиш. – М.-Л.: Просвещение, 1965. – С. 120-128.