Try this site:
- For Teachers
Hello, teacher my name is Fernando nad I want to know about the transitive and intrasitive verbs, how are they used, definition, exceptions I mean, all about them. thank you very much teacher
Try this site:
Donīt worry too much about the names "transitive" and "intransitive". These are just regular verbs. We call a verb "transitive" because it can take (has) an object:
1. "He rode his bicycle to work" - He(subject) rode(verb) bicycle(object). TRANSITIVE (because it can "transit" into the passive voice)
2. "Riding your bicycle to work is healthy." bicycle(subject) is(verb) (healthy is an adverb). There is no object. INTRANSITIVE (because it cannot "transit" into the passive voice.
One reason we have these two names for verbs to to identify the passive and impassive voice - only a transitive verb can be used in the passive voice, i.e. "His bicycle was ridden to work" (passive)
There is no way to put the second sentence into passive form because the verb is "intransitive".
Also, many verbs can be both transitive and intransitive, depending on how they are used in the sentence. But donīt worry too much about these verb forms. They are just verbs.
1. There is no such thing as the 'impassive voice': the two voices of the English verb are ACTIVE and PASSIVE.
2. 'Healthy' is an adjective, not an adverb (here complementing a copular verb, although technically copulas are a kind of intransitive verb).
3. The terms 'transitive' and 'intransitive' relate to the transition of an action from subject to object: they have nothing inherently to do with the passivizability of verbs. Although it does happen to be true that, of the two types, only transitive verbs can be passivized, it's as well to bear in mind that not all transitive verbs can be passivized (e.g. resemble: transitive, but active only).
I here intend on pointing out that when we teach we do so with correct information and not mere criticism. Also, I intend not only on critiquing your remarks, but on providing some helpful information to the actual question, which was what the student asked for. Prior to these points, though, I might further clarify (how pure criticism is inadequate) by exemplifying how illogical it would be to, upon hearing one student of a class ask a question and another student reply incorrectly to that question, merely interject "incorrect" to the given response, while then going on to explain how the response was itself false, yet not going on (as the teacher) to actually address the original question. Not going on (as the teacher) to address the question itself, as though, it did not require answering.
You first said, "there is no such thing as the impassive voice in English." This is incorrect. It is merely that the person above had, on the nonce, referred to the active voice through a negative prefixing of the antonym, "passive". That is, as used above it is a synonym to the conventional adjective "active." It is not because a word is not found in a dictionary or that it is observed in a conventional way, that English users are not allowed to refer to a given meaning through neologistic, though still pertinent literalization. And, seeing as how the person chose to contextualize the adjective alongside its antonym, (passive), it was then clear to the understanding. And, this is the foundation upon which our medium is based, understanding. In the case text, the context more than clarifies that which "active" signifies; and thus, could mean no other thing than the opposite of passive. The prefix is correct, as well. (Im-). Hence, if you are out to critique, why not do so correctly? Why not merely assert that conventionally, English grammarians use "active" as the opposite adjective of "passive", but that "impassive" in the context can just as easily suffice? The original question was not about passive or impassive nor conventional or idiosyncratic word usages. It was not about morphological antonyms versus semantic nor most of anything else you sought to explain. And to only point such out (without actually going on to provide helpful information to the original question) seems mostly pedantic; especially, in the technical wording you chose.
Your second point was about "healthy" being an adjective in place of an adverb. While I agree that pointing this out is good, language learners are very much attentive to such distinctions and could just have easily as drawn the difference. This is not to suggest that such should go on unaddressed but, that, it does not actually deal with the posed question. It has nothing to do with it, in fact. Again, if one student asked "how does you say "arc-bouter" en English?" And, another student said, "he say to lay down" we would not as teachers focus on the second student's improper usage of the third person singular but first, on the wrong translation and, if we wanted to draw attention to the more academic (syntactical) points, [then] we would do so with [those] of [either] student in place of just focusing on the answer of the latter. Again, it is not usually non-native speakers who are unaware of grammatical differences between verbs, adjectives or on but English natives themselves. While the error was a serious one, it could have just as easily been a result of poor attention. Nonetheless, the actual question in your response goes on unanswered. Unaddressed.
Now, for your third point; indeed transitive and intransitive can be described in a number of ways. Though, since not everybody in the world is passionate about, or has happened upon grammar in the way that few of us are and have, you might consider listing clear examples and explaining some key difficulties in basic English. Aside what you said about intransitive verbs and their ability or inability to be made passive, I will quote the dictionary.com definition of a transitive verb so that there is no confusion. And, I will stress that there should be no confusion. A transitive verb: "a verb that indicates a complete action without being accompanied by a direct object, as sit or lie, and, in English, that does not form a passive." (The link is: intransitive verb definition | Dictionary.com). I will not be criticizing what you said in your third point above and beyond this erroneous remark. It is not because we can find exceptions in a given system that there is not then a rule of thumb. And, indeed contrary to your performance, part of the definition of an intransitive verb in our language is that it cannot be made passive. Above and beyond such however, I will be drawing our attention away from your point and back to the actual question. The difference between Transitive and Intransitive verbs.
Intransitive verbs are followed by no obligatory object.
Transitive verbs are followed by an object and occur in a:
subject-verb-object sentence or,
subject-verb-object-indirect object sentence or,
subject-verb-object-complement sentence or a,
Here is a graph of each of those syntactical sentences. (S)ubject, (V)erb, (O)bject, (C)omplement, and (A)dverb 1-7.
TYPE SVOO:------He-----l--GAVE--l-us/a pen-l-----------------l-------5
TYPE SVOC:-------I------lconsiderl-this pen--l--poor quality----l--------6
TYPE SVOA -----She-----l-had to--l-put------l-the tools-------l-outside7
An intransitive verb (1. to breeze) has no object. We cannot use this verb with an object. We cannot breeze a box. Wind cannot breeze feathers. Nor can breeze be made into the passive if we are using conventional grammar. If you think on the nature of this verb (to breeze), you will see that there is no animate agent (like a human or animal) and that this plays an important role in whether or not the verb can act on an object. If you search in your mind for an intransitive verb and conclude that you have found one, I would suggest to confer Dictionary.com (and other dictionaries) to see if it is actually [only] intransitive. Most verbs that seem intransitive at first thought [are actually] both intransitive and transitive! A transitive verb has an object. (2. to hate, 5. to give, 6. to consider and 7. to put.)
However, there are not just transitive and intransitive verbs. There are also what is considered monotransitive (1. SVO), ditransitive verbs (5 SBOO) and complex transitive verbs (6,7 SCOV SCOA).
A good way to understand the differences and build your memory on them is, in the event of uncertainty, search your mind for intransitive verbs. Once you think you have one, ask yourself if it can take an object and if you can make a passive sentence with it. Afterward, go to a [good] dictionary and check, and you will see that it is probably mostly intransitive (that is, it has a lot of intransitive usages) but also a little bit transitive (with a few transitive usages). Also, always be sure to search for citations in the dictionary, not just the senses or whether the verb is in/transitive. A dictionary citation is a usage quotation from the English language. In this way, you can critically compare what you conclude with the definition. Making references is a part of learning and learning never stops. As for anyone "out to critique", remember that people come here for answers. Not quibbling over irrelevant points.
Thank you very much for this detailed explanation. Can you tell me please how to explain to youngsters I am mentoring that to say "He ran the race yesterday." is correct, but to say "He had already ran the race when I called him." is not correct. In other words, the second sentence should be "He had already run the race when I called him."
Sometimes explaining these things in a way that helps people to understand can be very difficult.
The simple answer to it is, of course, that a form of the auxiliary verb 'have' must be followed by a past participle (run) and not a past tense (ran). I presume, however, that you are well aware of this, and that what you are seeking is a good way to explain the point simply to children.
I'm sure that someone will be pleased to help you with your question if you care to repost it.
Webster's 1828, and the meaning given is to do with not having or showing emotions, which is far from an exact synonym of 'active'.
impassive - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
impassive definition - Dictionary - MSN Encarta
impassive - OneLook Dictionary Search
A Transitive Verb is one that takes an object.
An intransitive verb is one that does not take an object.