David cleaned the window. The window was cleaned by David.

[Mike MC]

What's the difference between, for example, the following sentences:
David cleaned the window.
The window was cleaned by David.

 

[5jj]

The obvious difference is that the first sentence has a verb in the active voice, the second one in the passive voice.

The second difference is that the first sentence is normal and natural. The second isn't, unless you have a particular context in mind.

 

[Mike MC]

Thanks for the answer, but it was just an example. My question is why we use the by-agent passive voice when we can simply use the active voice. When we can simply say, "sb does sth", why is there "sth is done by sb" in English? What's the philosophy of using such a structure? Sorry if my question wasn't clear at first!

 

[Rover_KE]

Click here and read 5jj's excellent post #4.

Please don't abbreviate somebody and something. I know dictionaries do, but that's to save space.

 

[5jj]

The simple answer is that we use the active voice far more often than we use the passive voice + by + agent. We use the passive voice mainly when we have reasons for not mentioning the agent, or when the agent is not the focus of our attention. Compare these three:

Edward III founded The Most Noble Order of the Garter in 1348. We are focusing attention on an act of Edward III.
The Most Noble Order of the Garter was founded by Edward III in 1348. We are focusing attention on the foundation of the order rather than on the agent..
The Most Noble Order of the Garter was founded in 1348. We are not interested in the agent at all.

(Crossposted with Rover)

 

[emsr2d2]

MikeMC, please note that I have changed your thread title. Titles should be unique and relevant to the thread, and should contain some/all of the words/phrases/sentences you are asking us about. Your question (and topic, if necessary) should appear only in the main body of your text.

 

[Mike MC]

Compare these three:
Edward III founded The Most Noble Order of the Garter in 1348. We are focusing attention on an act of Edward III.
The Most Noble Order of the Garter was founded by Edward III in 1348. We are focusing attention on the foundation of the order rather than on the agent..

I read your post a couple of times, but still don't understand the difference between the first and second examples. As you say, in your first example the focus is on his act, and in the second on the foundation of the order: Aren't his act and the foundation of the order the same?

 

[Tdol]

What is more important - the window or the cleaner? The passive form would suggest that the window is the focus, but nothing in the context tells us why. The stained-glass windows in York Minster were cleaned by specialists- here, we're more concerned with the windows. We can live without knowing who the specialists were as long as they did a good job.

 

[jutfrank]

I read your post a couple of times, but still don't understand the difference between the first and second examples. As you say, in your first example the focus is on his act, and in the second on the foundation of the order: Aren't his act and the foundation of the order the same?

The focus is on whatever the sentence subject is (shown in blue):

Edward III founded The Most Noble Order of the Garter in 1348.

The Most Noble Order of the Garter was founded by Edward III in 1348.
The Most Noble Order of the Garter was founded in 1348.

 

[Phaedrus]

We use the passive voice mainly when we have reasons for not mentioning the agent, or when the agent is not the focus of our attention.

I agree with that for the most part. Sometimes, however, the (syntactically unnecessary) addition of an agent "by"-phrase in the passive voice does serve to focus attention on the agent, by virtue of giving the agent end focus within the sentences.

For example, in the sentence "Leonardo da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa," we learn that painting the Mona Lisa was something that Leonardo da Vinci did. However, is our focus really on Leonardo da Vinci's agency more than in the passive correlate ("The Mona Lisa was painted by Leonardo da Vinci")?

Regarding the sentences in the OP, my feeling is that "David cleaned the window" answers the question "What did David do?" more than the question "Who cleaned the window?," though it entails, of course, an answer to both questions.

As a full-sentence answer to the question "Who cleaned the window?," "The window was cleaned by David" works nicely, in my opinion. This is not to deny that the truncated answers "David" or "David did" would also be quite natural and normal.

 

[Tdol]

Also, you would have to create a context for Who were these windows cleaned by? to be a natural question.

 

[TheParser]

When we can simply say, "sb does sth", why is there "sth is done by sb" in English? What's the philosophy of using such a structure?

NOT A TEACHER



Mike, my teachers taught me that sometimes the passive is used if one wants to be very polite or less confrontational.

For example, which sentence (which I made up) do you think is more polite?: (1) "I put my sandwich in the office refrigerator this morning. Now it's gone. I demand to know who took it." or (2) "I put my sandwich in the office refrigerator this morning. Now it's gone. I am pretty sure that it was taken by accident."

 

[5jj]

(1) "I put my sandwich in the office refrigerator this morning. Now it's gone. I demand to know who took it."
(2) "I put my sandwich in the office refrigerator this morning. Now it's gone. I am pretty sure that it was taken by accident."

You cannot put the less confrontational tone of (2) simply down the use of the passive.

 

[Phaedrus]

We use the passive voice mainly when we have reasons for not mentioning the agent, or when the agent is not the focus of our attention.

I'd like to pursue that line of thought a bit further. When it is just the impact of the action itself that matters, we often use the passive and do not mention the agent at all. If a landlord wanted to rent a room with one window, and hired cleaners to clean it, it would be better for the cleaners to report back with (a) rather than (b):

(a) The window was cleaned.
(b) ? David cleaned the window.

The landlord doesn't care who cleaned the window; he doesn't even know who David is! He only cares that the cleaning of the window took place. Of course, the passive voice is not necessitated in that context. The active voice could still be used:

(c) We cleaned the window. (active voice; "we" = the cleaning people)
(d) Someone cleaned the window. (active voice; presumably "someone" = one of the cleaners)