Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-zzw9c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-16T22:45:11.491Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Developments in the Passive Construction

from Part II - Tracking Change in the History of English

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2025

Joan C. Beal
Affiliation:
University of Sheffield
Get access

Summary

In English, either the agent or the patient of an event can be topicalised. The active codes the first, unmarked option (A cat broke the vase), the second is achieved by the passive. This chapter discusses the complex history of the second option. While in Old English, passives were primarily adjectival. From Middle English onward, they became increasingly verbal, coding the outcome of a transitive event, and were used as a viewpoint construction, or to structure the discourse. Word order was also changing, restricting initial position more and more to an ever more versatile subject. The passive, catering for this versatile subject position, expanded to cross-linguistically uncommon forms such as the prepositional and recipient passives, and so did the novel mediopassive. The expansion saw its completion with the progressive passive in the eighteenth century. Special attention is devoted to the interconnectedness of these different passives, and their changing relations.

Information

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allen, Cynthia. 1995. Case Marking and Reanalysis. Grammatical Relations from Old to Early Modern English. Oxford: Clarendon Press.10.1093/oso/9780198240969.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderwald, Lieselotte. 2016. Language between Description and Prescription: Verb Categories in Nineteenth-Century Grammars of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Anthonissen, Lynn. 2020. Special passives across the lifespan: cognitive and social mechanisms. PhD thesis, University of Antwerp.Google Scholar
Anthonissen, Lynn. 2021. Individuality in Language Change. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110725841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beal, Joan C. 2004. English in Modern Times 1700–1945. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Birner, Betty and Ward, Gregory. 1998. Information Status and Noncanonical Word Order in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christophersen, Paul. 1952. Comments. English Studies 33: 140141.Google Scholar
Cornelis, Louise H. 1997. Passive and Perspective. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Cuyckens, Hubert. 1999. Historical evidence in prepositional semantics: the case of English ‘by’. In Tops, Guy A. J, Devriendt, Betty and Geukens, Steven (eds.), Thinking English Grammar: To Honour Xavier Dekeyser, Professor Emeritus. Orbis Supplementa 12. Leuven: Peeters, pp. 1532.Google Scholar
Dal, Ingerid and Eroms, Hans-Werner. 2014. Kurze deutsche Syntax auf historischer Grundlage. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Denison, David. 1985. Why Old English had no prepositional passive. English Studies 66: 189204.10.1080/00138388508598384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denison, David. 1993. English Historical Syntax: Verbal Constructions. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Dreschler, Gea. 2015. Passives and the Loss of Verb Second: A Study of Syntactic and Information-Structural Factors. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Dreschler, Gea. 2019. ‘Fifty pounds will buy me a pair of horses for my carriage’: the history of permissive subjects in English. English Language and Linguistics 24.4: 719744.10.1017/S1360674319000194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fanego, Teresa. 2004. On reanalysis and actualization in syntactic change: the rise and development of English verbal gerunds. Diachronica 21: 555.10.1075/dia.21.1.03fanCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feng, Shuang. 2014. On the development of middles in the history of English. Ivy 47: 2139.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga. 1989. The origin and spread of the accusative and infinitive construction in English. Folia Linguistica Historica 8.1/2: 143217.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga. 1992. Syntactic change and borrowing: the case of the accusative-and-infinitive construction in English. In Gerritsen, Marinel and Stein, Dieter (eds.), Internal and External Factors in Syntactic Change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1789.10.1515/9783110886047.17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Olga, Van Kemenade, Ans, Koopman, Willem and Van der Wurff, Wim. 2000. The Syntax of Early English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fleisher, Nicholas. 2006. The origin of passive get. English Language and Linguistics 10.2: 225252.Google Scholar
Fraser, Thomas. 1985. Did OE have a middle voice? In Fisiak, Jacek and Ahlquist, Anders (eds.), Papers from the Sixth International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 129138.Google Scholar
Fraser, Thomas. 1987. The establishment of by to denote agency in English passive constructions. In Ramat, Giacalone, Carruba, Onofrio and Bernini, Giuliano (eds.), Papers from the Seventh International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 239249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goh, Gwang-Yoon. 2000. The synchrony and diachrony of the English prepositional passive. PhD thesis, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Henk, Antony. 2020. Toward a source for Vercelli VII: an analysis of three continental examples of in Epistula ad Hebraeos Chrysostom a Mutiano, sermo XXIX in three codices. MA seminar paper. www.academia.edu/45101514/Toward_a_Source_for_Vercelli_VII.Google Scholar
Henley, Nancy M., Miller, Michelle and Anne Beazley, Jo. 1995. Syntax, semantics, and sexual violence: agency and the passive voice. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 14: 6084.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. 1979. Aspect and foregrounding in discourse. In Givón, Talmy (ed.), Discourse and Syntax. New York: Academic Press, pp. 213241.Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney D. 1971. The Sentence in Written English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 2001. What corpora tell us about the grammaticalisation of voice in get-constructions. Studies in Language 25.1: 4987.Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 2004. The passival and the progressive passive: a case study of layering in the English aspect and voice systems. In Lindquist, Hans and Mair, Christian (eds.), Corpus Approaches to Grammaticalisation in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 79117.Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 2007. English Mediopassive Constructions. Amsterdam: Rodopi.10.1163/9789401203784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Howard and Macleod, Morgan. 2017. The status of passive constructions in Old English. Transactions of the Philological Society 116.1: 5990.10.1111/1467-968X.12101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaltenbach, Lena. 2020. The recipient passive in the history of English. Mannheim Papers in Multilingualism, Acquisition and Change 1: 73112.Google Scholar
Kilpiö, Matti. 1989. Passive Constructions in Old English Translations from Latin: With Special Reference to the OE Bede and the Pastoral Care. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Kuno, Susumo. 1987. Functional Syntax, Anaphora, Discourse and Empathy. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Los, Bettelou. 2002. The loss of the indefinite pronoun man. In Fanego, Teresa, Lopez-Couso, Maria Jose and Perez-Guerra, Javier (eds.), English Historical Syntax and Morphology: Selected Papers from 11 ICEHL, Santiago de Compostela, 7–11 September. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 181202.Google Scholar
Los, Bettelou. 2009. The consequences of the loss of verb-second in English: information structure and syntax in interaction. English Language and Linguistics 13.1: 97125.Google Scholar
Los, Bettelou and Dreschler, Gea. 2012. The loss of local anchoring: from adverbial local anchors to permissive subjects. In Nevalainen, Terttu and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 859871.Google Scholar
Mair, Christian and Leech, Geoffrey. 2021. Current changes in English syntax. In Aarts, Bas, McMahon, April and Hinrichs, Lars (eds.), The Handbook of English Linguistics. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 249276.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Bruce. 1985. Old English Syntax, Vol. 1: Concord, the Parts of Speech and the Sentence. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Mustanoja, Tauno F. 1960. A Middle English Syntax. Helsinki: Société néophilologique.Google Scholar
Narrog, Heiko. 2015. (Inter)subjectification and its limits in secondary grammaticalization. Language Sciences 47: 148160.Google Scholar
Noël, Dirk. 2001. The passive matrices of English infinitival complement clauses: evidentials on the road to auxiliarihood. Studies in Language 25.2: 255296.10.1075/sl.25.2.04noeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noël, Dirk. 2008. The nominative and infinitive in Late Modern English: a diachronic constructionist approach. Journal of English Linguistics 36.4: 314340.10.1177/0075424208321750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noël, Dirk and Colleman, Timothy. 2009. The nominative and infinitive in English and Dutch: an exercise in contrastive diachronic construction grammar. Languages in Contrast 9.1: 144181.Google Scholar
Parliament. 1775. Rotuli Parliamentorum, ut et Petitiones, et Placita in Parliamento … : Ab Anno Decimo Octavo R. Henrici Sexti ad Finem eiusdem Regni (u.a.), Volume 5. Great Britain: Parliament.Google Scholar
Pelle, Stephen. 2012. Sources and analogues for Blickling homily V and Vercelli homily XI. Notes and Queries 59: 813.Google Scholar
Petré, Pete. 2010. The functions of weorðan and its loss in the past tense in Old and Middle English. English Language and Linguistics 14.3: 457484.10.1017/S1360674310000158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petré, Peter. 2014. Constructions and Environments: Copular, Passive and Related Constructions in Old and Middle English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Petré, Peter. 2015. What grammar reveals about sex and death: interdisciplinary applications of corpus-based linguistics. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 30.3: 371387.Google Scholar
Petré, Peter. 2018. Die Rolle der Frequenz in der Grammatikalisierung: lange Passive mit by im Englischen. Sprachwissenschaft 43.2: 251280.Google Scholar
Petré, Peter and Anthonissen, Lynn. 2020. Individuality in complex systems: a constructionist approach. Cognitive Linguistics 31.2: 185212.Google Scholar
Petré, Peter, Anthonissen, Lynn, Budts, Sara, Manjavacas, Enrique, Silva, Emma-Louise, Standing, William and Strik, Odile A.O.. 2019. Early Modern Multiloquent Authors (EMMA): designing a large-scale corpus of individuals’ languages. ICAME Journal 43: 83122.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey and Svartvik, Jan. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Scheffer, Johannes. 1975. The Progressive in English. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Schiegg, Markus and Petré, Peter. Forthcoming. Individual variation and change across the lifespan. In Drinka, Bridget, Nevalainen, Terttu and Rutten, Gijsbert (eds.), The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics. Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Seoane, Elena. 1999. The consolidation of the indirect and prepositional passive in Early Modern English: evidence from the Helsinki Corpus. Ingleses de la Universidad Complutense 7: 119139.Google Scholar
Seoane, Elena. 2006. Information structure and word order change: the passive as an information-rearranging strategy in the history of English. In van Kemenade, Ans and Los, Bettelou (eds.), The Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 224248.Google Scholar
Seoane, Elena. 2010. The effect of prominence hierarchies on Modern English long passives: pragmatic vs. syntactic factors. Miscelánea: A Journal of English and American Studies 41: 93106.Google Scholar
Posse, Seoane, Elena, . 2000. The passive as an information-rearranging device in Early Modern English. Studia Neophilologica 72: 2433.Google Scholar
Smirnova, Elena and Mailhammer, Robert. 2013. Incipient grammaticalisation: sources of passive constructions in Old High German and Old English. In Diewald, Gabriele, Wischer, Ilse and Kahlas-Tarkka, Leena (eds.), Comparative Studies in Early Germanic Languages: With a Focus on Verbal Categories. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 4170.Google Scholar
Smirnova, Elena, Mailhammer, Robert and Flach, Susanne. 2019. The role of atypical constellations in the grammaticalization of German and English passives. Diachronica 36.3: 384416.10.1075/dia.16033.smiCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smitterberg, Erik. 2005. The Progressive in Nineteenth-Century English. A Process of Integration. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Sundby, Bertil, Kari Bjørge, Anne and Haugland, Kari E.. 1991. A Dictionary of English Normative Grammar 1700–1800. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Toyota, Junichi. 2008. Diachronic Change in the English Passive. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C. 2003. From subjectification to intersubjectification. In Hickey, Raymond (ed.), Motives for Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 124139.10.1017/CBO9780511486937.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C. and Trousdale, Graeme. 2013. Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van de Horst, , Joop, . 2008. Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse syntaxis, deel 2 [History of Dutch syntax, volume 2]. Leuven: Universitaire Pers.Google Scholar
Visser, Frederic Th. 1963–1973. An Historical Syntax of the English Language. 3 vols. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Warner, Anthony R. 1982. Complementation in Middle English and the Methodology of Historical Syntax: A Study of the Wyclifite Sermons. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Warner, Anthony R. 1995. Predicting the progressive passive: parametric change within a lexicalist framework. Language 71.3: 533557.10.2307/416219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamamoto, Mutsumi. 1999. Animacy and Reference: A Cognitive Approach to Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Yáñez-Bouza, Nuria. 2018. Grammar writing in the eighteenth century. In Nevalainen, Terttu, Palander-Collin, Minna and Säily, Tanja (eds.), Patterns of Change in Eighteenth-Century English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 2742.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×