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