Helpnest Feature #5 The active voice versus the passive voice

(Posted by Andrea Duff from the University of South Australia on behalf of Associate Professor Linda Bergmann from Purdue University)


'Active' and 'Passive' in writing refer to neither tense nor tone, but to voice.

The active voice sentence order is subject-verb-objective (or complement).  The passive voice order reverses this: object, a tense of the verb "to be" with the past participle of the sentence verb and then "by [the subject]."   The subject can often be dropped.

Here's an example:

http://wn.com/Dog_Bites_man!

Active:  The dog [subject] bit the boy [object].  
Passive:  The boy [object] was bitten by the dog [subject].  or   The boy [object] was bitten.

In the use of 'objective' versus 'subjective' writing, you can use either voice to achieve either goal.

The objective/subjective connection comes in when people are writing reports in which the observer is expected to appear impartial because the passive voice allows you to drop the use of  'I' (or hide the 'I' or other actor).

Using the example above, you can use the passive voice to hide the culprit (dog) which can be useful at times :-).  Alternatively, you can use it to suggest that the observation, not the observer, is the important information.

On the other hand, the active voice generally produces greater clarity, particularly in sentences with several modifying phrases and/or clauses.

I've consciously chosen to use 'you' in many of the sentences above, in order to avoid using the passive or using 'one' as the subject.  ('One' can sound pretentious in American English, although perhaps not in other Englishes.)

In my opinion, the best discussion of these issues can be found in Williams' Style: Ten Lessons Pearson/Longman.

Linda

Visit the Owl, Possum (and Kiwi) Helpnest to post your question

Reference correctly or it's the Star Chamber

A well-entrenched role at universities is that of the 'Academic Integrity Officer' (AIO).  At UniSA (and other institutions would have their equivalent), the role of the AIO is one of assisting students to understand the philosophies and mechanics of attributing another's work.  Often students are referred to the AIO after their lecturer has found significant plagiarism in their work.

'Attribution' is regarded as a 'moral right'. Sounds about right? It seems only 'fair' to reference the ideas and hard work of other people, and not pass these off as your own. That would be cheating, right?  Why should you get credit for using work that you haven't done yourself?  That's a no-brainer.  However, the answers to these questions might not be a clear-cut as they seem.

Firstly, citation and referencing traditions are not the same across cultures. In Chinese culture, for example, knowledge has collective ownership and it is expected a student and their teacher will know where information has come from (and therefore not be expected to explicitly cite it).

Secondly, the traditions have also changed over time.

It used to be the case that if you produced and disseminated information, you would find your printing presses smashed to smithereens.  Worse still, you might find yourself in the Star Chamber, wishing you hadn't insulted the King about his new hat in your pamphlet or tract.  The private ownership of information did not feature very strongly in an age where literacy among the populous was low and the Monarch was 'in charge' of people's thoughts and ideas.  (In fact, right up until the late 1800s, people read out-loud in communal groups as private reading meant you were a shifty character with something to hide.)

We love your hat, Your Majesty.  Really we do!  (Wikipedia, 2011)

Eventually, as the spread of information became unstoppable, censorship by the State became increasingly unfashionable.  John Milton in his seminal work Areopagitica (he who destroys a good book, kills reason itself, kills the image of God...) espoused the values of free speech.   Freedom of speech principles were enshrined in the cafes of Paris, in the Bill of Rights in the US and eventually in the media.  The railways and eventually telegraph saw an unstoppable proliferation of information and ideas.

However, those who came up with the 'ideas' did not have a right to earn an income from these.   Indeed,   the printers owned any income from the sale of books once they were distributed.

Copyright law (through the Act of Anne, 1709) recognised people's right to the ownership of information for income purposes.  The 'moral right' of attribution was intermingled with this.  Thus grew the Western ethos related to attribution and 'ownership' of information.

Various amendments to Copyright Acts have tried to keep a-pace with the changes in technology and dissemination and the Act can now be viewed as performing at least two functions. The first of these is to protect a person's right to make money.  The second of these is to protect the 'Moral Rights' of the person who produced the information.  The Act also covers things such as treatment of another's work for satirical purposes and 'fair use' for academic purposes.

But what about the challenges posed by the Internet? Photographs, fragments and chunks of information can be recycled thousands - possibly millions - of times so that the original source becomes anything from obscure to invisible.  Photos can be broken up, mashed up and mixed with bits and bytes of sound and imagery so that the original source is barely recognisable.   Do we have time to track back to original sources of information?  (Smith in FlickR in Google in Wikipedia in PhotoBucket in YouTube adapted from Alice-in-Wonderland, 1865.)

Clearly, the implications for established scholarly traditions may be challenged by the Internet, but there are still some very good reasons to practice attribution.

Firstly (unlike a blog, which is meant to be subjective and opinionated writing), attribution adds weight to your argument - thereby attracting marks.  Secondly, reference to scholarly sources and studies makes your paper look professional.   Thirdly, we still hold dear the traditions of 'fair play' in the Western tradition.  Palming off another person's hard work as your own just doesn't seem fair.  It doesn't feel right.

Familiarise yourself with the rules and remember that correct referencing, paraphrasing and other academic skills do take time to develop.   Learning and Teaching Units, the Purdue Writing Lab (and, indeed, your local Academic Integrity Officer) can help you with the skill.

Good luck
Andrea

Tea for two

As an English person living in Australia, I sometimes come across terms which have different meanings here compared to the UK. One such example is ‘high tea’. To me, with my English background, high tea is a fairly substantial meal served at about 5 or 6pm. It might include hefty slices of bread and butter, ham, salad, scones and fruit cake, probably served with mugs of tea from a big, solid tea pot. This fits the definition given by the Macquarie dictionary of ‘a meal eaten in the late afternoon or early evening, typically with a cooked dish, bread and butter, and tea to drink (usually taking the place of dinner).’ There is nothing delicate, to me, about high tea.

Afternoon tea in the UK is a much more refined affair, with cucumber sandwiches, small cakes arranged daintily on a tiered cake stand, scones with jam, and specialised blends of tea served in pretty porcelain cups (with saucers, of course!). It is usually taken at about 3pm.

In Australia, however, I have found the term ‘high tea’ used to describe what I would refer to as ‘afternoon tea’. Thus an Australian high tea is served mid-afternoon, and is an elegant repast of scones, small sandwiches, little cakes and tea.

This has prompted me to do a bit of research on how other countries view high tea. As far as I can see, high tea in Australia, Jamaica, South Africa and the United States is what I would call ‘afternoon tea’ in the UK. I may be wrong about this, though, and would love to see your comments on how this term is used in your country. You can contribute by voting in the poll, and by leaving a comment below. Our bloggers in India and China may have lots to say on this subject!

University essay writing – five top tips

The new academic year has just started in Australia, and the universities are full of new and returning students, some planning to do well, some aiming to do really well, and some maybe just hoping to muddle through. Academic skills advisors are here to help you make the most of your studies and get the best grades you can, so here are five top tips to help you do well in a Western university:

1) Plan your assignments. If you’re like I was as an undergraduate, you’ll think planning is boring and you’ll jump straight into writing your essay. Think again. If you don’t know where your essay is heading, the chances are you’ll lose direction and end up nowhere, with a string of ideas that may be excellent but are lacking in cohesion. To avoid this, you need to plan a structure.

2) Structure your assignments. Think about the question in your title, then think about your response to that question. This will give you your conclusion. Next, consider why you think this; that will give you the body points. Then all you have to do is write the essay, starting with the body points and leading to your considered conclusion. Finally, you can write the introduction. Of course you can write the introduction first, but be careful that writing the introduction does not become merely an essay planning exercise. Remember too to introduce each paragraph with a topic sentence, and keep to one topic in each paragraph.

3) Read efficiently. Did you know that you don’t need to read every word of your books or journal articles in order to gain information? If you’re not sure if something will be useful, read the introduction and conclusion first. Then, if it seems that the text will be helpful, scan through for key words from your essay title, as well as synonyms of these key words. Finally, read the sections of text that seem most relevant.

4) Reference correctly. In Australia, the US and the UK, as well as many other countries, it is important to put a reference in the text (or in a footnote) every time you refer to an idea from someone else, even if you are not quoting directly. This reference should appear next to the idea or quote, and not just at the end of a paragraph. It also needs to appear in a reference list at the end of the assignment. The importance of referencing in academic writing cannot be overstated, as failure to reference in Western academic culture is seen as plagiarism. There is a humorous video clip here that illustrates this. Referencing may have different rules in different academic cultures, so if you’re studying at or through a Western university be sure to check what you need to do and which system to follow.

5) Critique, don’t just describe. In Western academic culture you are not expected to agree with everything your lecturer says; you are expected to argue and discuss and present a point of view. That means that you should think critically about what you read, and not just describe a writer’s ideas. Maybe other writers disagree, or maybe they support your first writer? Make sure you can see how these perspectives meet or diverge, and be prepared to argue your case and persuade the reader why your answer to the question is correct.

What about grammar, you say? If your essay is well structured and argued, with one main point in each paragraph, a clear introduction and conclusion and good referencing, the language will be only a minor issue for most Western lecturers, as long as what you say can be understood. If you’re not sure about vocabulary or collocations, try a learner’s dictionary for examples. (See my previous post for details of different learner's dictionaries.)

As you can see, I’m writing from an Australian perspective. If you do things differently in your country we’d love to hear from you and compare approaches. It would make a really interesting discussion.

Wherever you are, good luck with your essay writing!
Julia

You say tomato and I say tomaito...

Thanks to Junior G for the inspiration and (again) my children for pointing this one out to me. This thought-provoking and satirical piece demonstrates how individual differences in pronouncing words can have some nasty consequences.

'Milk' or 'Mulk' by Julian Smith.


Here is another (somewhat less confronting) clip from Susanna which shows how pronunciation impacts on language:



And another from Julia about what happens when you get it wrong while trying to speak in another language - in this case, Mandarin.  This one comes from the popular television program, the Big Bang Theory,



Enjoy!

Andrea

What's in a word? Another shameless plug for the Owl and Possum Helpnest

Where are my bras? (or It's enough to give you pluralsy)

One size does not always fit all.

This question is surely a way to raise the ire of my 16-year-old grammarian daughter who says (after my habitual linguistic faux pas), 'mum, it's NOT bras, it's bra. It's SINGULAR. ONE BRA'. I then answer (rather smartly and smugly, even if it is a non-sequitur), 'well how come it's over-the-shoulder-boulder-holders, then, and not over-the-shoulder-boulder-holder?' (A quick search on Wikipedia has confirmed that the brassiere * is mostly referred to as 'bra', but I am not owning up to that one!)

My 13-year-old is similarly vexed when I ask, 'can I please borrow your hair straighteners'. She self-assuredly answers, 'mum, it's not hair straighters, it's hair straightener. It's SINGULAR. ONE HAIR STRAIGHTENER'. To which I answer, 'well how come it's curling tongs and not curling tong?!'

Don't you love it when your kids correct you?

I expect my long-standing pluralsy is generational and was conditioned into me at a very young age by my mother who always referred to her 'bras' and not to her 'bra'. Perhaps she was using an abbreviated version of brassiere* rather than meaning it to be plural? That's it. She was being sophisticated.

This little linguistic idiosyncrasy was part of a suite of quirks which included unusual pronunciations ('brocol-eye' instead of 'brocol-ee', for example) and culturally adapted words and phrases ('Dr Logan hung his entrails on a brass plaque outside his door').

We can go on and on through life using these family adaptations, not realising how daft we sound until a 16 or 13-year-old corrects us.

Just when we think we have mastered the art of self-correction, though, they can turn the tables once again:

'Mum - did you say straighten your hairs? Because if you did, you are technically correct as there is more than one hair on your head.'

Go figure.

Do share your own family foibles. I'm sure every one of our blogging community must have them. As long as they don't find their way into a public speech or university essay, then they're kind of cute.

Andrea

* A quaint point I would like to share with you (and I am laughing as I write this) is that we have our own little cup of bra history in Adelaide. Yes, little old Adelaide "down under", in South Australia, at the bottom of the world (or top, whichever way you want to look at it) is home of the sports bra. This was invented by composer, pianist, Adelaidian AND New Yorker, Percy Grainger. Mr Grainger's life makes for very interesting reading.

Percy Aldridge Grainger (1882–1961) from Wikipedia


Post your curly question to the Owl and Possum Helpnest

Helpnest Feature #4: Used (to) in So Many Ways

Greetings Grammophiles,

We recently received a request from Kathy asking about the history of the phrase "used to," as in "I used to drink coffee every morning, but now I drink tea" (personal note: this is a complete lie; my mornings are not complete without coffee). There are plenty of Web sites that discuss the grammar and usage of "used to," so I don't want to rehash what can be found elsewhere. If you are interested, here are a few links to The English Club, The British Council, and The Leo Network. However, Kathy did not ask how to use "used to," but rather where it came from. Enter the Oxford English Dictionary.

Apparently the verb "use + infinitive," meaning "accustomed to doing something," has a very long history in the English language. In fact, its heyday has long since come and gone. According to the OED, the verb was in very frequent use around the 1400s, and it shows up in the "Reeve's Tale" from Chaucer's Canterbury Tales:

"A theef he was,‥a sly, and vsaunt [v.r. usand] for to stele" (l. 20).

It also appears in my favorite work of literature, Edmund Spenser's The Faerie Queene, an imaginative romp through the magical and mysterious world of Faerylond that supposedly teaches the reader how to act like a gentleman. The joke, of course, is that no one in the poem acts like a gentlemen, so all the virtues have to be learned through negative examples, namely what we all used to do but should know better. Here's the reference.

"Her name Mercilla most men vse to call
That is a mayden Queene of high renowne,
For her great bounty knowen ouer all." (5.8.17)

I know what some of you are thinking. Isn't a "d" missing in the first line? Shouldn't it be "used to call?" The short answer is no. Back in the days of late Middle English and early modern English (1400-1600), speakers used "use" in all of its tenses. Even the phrase, "He is accustomed to calling her Mercilla," which still makes a little bit of sense to our tense-sensitive ears, still includes the past participle "accustomed" (may be a verbal adjective--a distinction I leave to the linguists). Nevertheless, the phrase conveys a sense of pastness. A modern translation of Spenser's present tense "use to call," would read something like, "He regularly calls her Mercilla."

Just to prove that I'm not cherry-picking my examples, here's one final example from Milton's History of Britain, this time about trends in English facial hair.

"The English then useing to let grow on thir upper-lip large Mustachio's."

I can't quite place "then useing" in a modern tense context. It has the progressive sense of the "-ing" but instead of a helping verb such as "were" or "had been" to complement the verb, we have an adverb of time "then." Go figure this one, but the point is that "use + infinitive" used to enjoy much more flexibility, especially in terms of tense, in the English language.

Thanks again Kathy for this prompt. It complemented my morning coffee quite well.

Brady Spangenberg

Are adjectives the enemy of the writer?

Duff (2010) freely available from PhotoBucket

 

The sun sunk in seconds, shimmering and hesitating just above the still waters before it disappeared for the evening.  As it faded it cast its apricot hues through the clouds which hovered low in the sky.

or

A beautiful sunset

Hello Grammophiles

An oft used adage in journalism is that the adjective is the enemy of the writer.  (Voltaire said they were the 'enemy of the noun'; Hemingway said they were the 'weak writer's crutch'.)

For example, I could say 'it's a splendidly gorgeous day today'  (which it is in Adelaide on this December day).   Alternatively, I could say 'the sun is warming my shoulders, glancing off the footpath and illuminating the leaves on the trees'.

Of course, used sparingly and effectively, adjectives can add colour and cleverness to the writing (as indicated by my esteemed colleague Brady, below).  

In academic writing, adjectives can be florid and over-the-top, weakening a set of data or a rational argument.

For example, 'numerous authors argue...'  is weaker than 'Smith (2000), Jones (2003) and Brown (2005) argue...

How does this:

'Smith's (2000) findings were a notable example of how millions of families use social technology.'

Compare with this:

'Smith's (2000) study of 150 households across three continents suggested children between the age of 13 and 18 preferred the use of Facebook, while their parents still tended to use email.'

Which paper, do you think, will attract more marks?

Can you think of more examples where actions speak louder  than words (as the old saying goes)?

Andrea

Help Nest Feature 3: Can You/Are You Able To Do This?

Greetings Grammophiles,

This post addresses a question submitted by Olga in the Ukraine [hello over there, by the way]. She wanted to know if a meaningful difference exists between the modal verbs "can" and "to be able to." Olga specifically referenced these verbs in the simple past (could and was able to), but in this case what holds true for the past is just as true for the present and future. First, you might ask what a modal verb is, and what does it do? Like their name implies, modal verbs indicate modality, a linguistic term that generally refers to the speaker's attitude or perception regarding possibility or preference. Among other things, modal verbs indicate how possible an action is (can she do it?); how well the person likes the action (she likes to run); or what the ethical importance of the action is (she should/must/ought to run).

Here is a short list of common modal verbs:

can, must, should, to be able, ought, like, will, may

Now, to Olga's question. Does a meaningful difference exist between could and was able to? The general consensus seems to be no with a few exceptions. In many cases, these two modals can (are able to) be substituted for each other without altering the meaning one bit. See, it's just that easy! However, you can take a few differences into consideration when searching for the "right" one.

1) can is shorter than is able to. It requires fewer short, choppy words, so it conveys your point more easily. Simply put, can is an easier, quicker, and therefore more attractive alternative.

2) can does tend to convey a more general meaning regarding ability as opposed to is able to. For example, the sentence, "I could catch the bus," reflects only your theoretical ability to catch the bus (if you wanted to), but the sentence, "I was able to catch the bus," sounds much more definitive and factual to our Anglicized ears (you actually caught it).

3) can does not imply tangible results (resultative), so in these situations, is able to is more appropriate. The sentence, "I ran so fast, I was able to catch the bus," shows the result of your running. If you were to substitute could in the second clause, it would not make sense.

So, Olga, should you continue marking your students' papers wrong if they use could instead of was able to? Yes, in two specific cases. If you are focusing on style and smooth prose, could often presents a better alternative because it is shorter and does not involve that lame, general verb "to be." If, however, your students are writing about results (one thing caused something else to happen, and that something else was enablement/ability to do something), then they should and ought to use was able to.

Whew! I hope I was able to help (or was it "could help"?).

Brady Spangenberg

Some Favorite Words from Paradise Lost

Greetings Grammo- and Logophiles!

In honor of an upcoming marathon reading of John Milton's Paradise Lost being held at Purdue on October 20, I thought I would highlight a few of our favorite words to read and say. Milton was a great wordsmith to say the least; by scholar Gavin Alexander's count, Milton coined at least 630 new English words, that compared to John Donne's 352 and Shakespeare's 229. Some of his more well-known coinages include "pandemonium," the name given to the devil's new fortress, or "lovelorn" to describe a forsaken nightingale. But these are too familiar; we are looking for obscure words that you can use to impress your friends.

I asked Purdue's resident Milton scholar, Professor Angeilca Duran (who is also coordinating the marathon reading), about her favorite MIlton words and phrases. She responded that she loves dwelling over mythological names like "Serapis," "Asmadai," or "Gorgonian." Even I had to look up Asmadai (6.365), who as it turns out is a traditional pagan god whom Milton identified with the fallen angels. If you aren't slumped over your computer yet with yawning boredom, here are few more philological oddities that are sure to impress both the ladies and the gentlemen.

* celestial panoply (6.760): a full suit of armor, bright and shiny

* hubbub (2.951): a confused noise often includes shouting and yelling

* verdurous (4.144): flourishing green

* jocund and boon (9.793): mirth, cheer, trivial gaiety
[MIlton uses this phrase to describe Eve just after she eats the fruit from the Tree of Forbidden Knowledge. Remember that next time you order a fruit smoothie!]

I would love to hear your favorite words from Milton or any other writer as well as some suggestions for other writers deserving of a place in the Wordsmith Hall of Fame.

Happy Hunting,
Brady Spangenberg