User:Seaghyn16 pp pvsa

Hey Krikit, would it be alright if I switched some of the 'passive voice' sentences into the 'active voice'? It will make the novel much more exciting to read. The meaning would remain the same. Thanks.

Akirasav 11:51, 25 September 2008 (PDT)

No problem. A passive voice sentence uses 'to be' verbs like: was, is, has, had, are, were, etc. An active voice sentence does not use 'to be' verbs. Examples:

Ryuuji was running to the store. (Passive)

Ryuuji ran to the store. (Active)

The first sentence is more of a statement, whereas the later is a action. The difference is subtle, but using more active voice sentences makes the overall novel more exciting to the reader.

Note that some 'to be' verbs are hard to eliminate without changing the meaning. So I will only rework sentences that are fairly obvious to improve. Hope this helps.

Akirasav 11:44, 26 September 2008 (PDT)

Isn't "was running" still active? In contrast to "ran", which would indicate Ryuuji already performed the action and has gotten to the store already, the present participle conjugation of "run" just indicates the action is still in effect. Of course, it's been a long time since I've taken an English class, but I thought passive voice followed "(to be verb)+(past tense verb)" format and　meant that the subject is not performing the action. For example, a passive sentence like "He was bitten by the dog." puts the dog rather than the actual subject in the acting position, whereas the active voice would be "The dog bit him.". Basically, the active voice maintains subject/verb linkage, strengthening the sense of action.

Even though I've started using plain past tense rather generously, I think the top sentence more closely follows the tensing in Japanese novels, which tend towards present/stative language. I also see a lot of instances where the verbs are explicitly conjugated into passive/(passive+causative) form, which I normally switch into active unless I forget. Active does tend to flow more smoothly, but progressive statements are usually fine and even passive sentences can contribute a certain nuance that the active voice cannot. Just saying, be careful about altering things unless you're at least somewhat confident that the new version retains the meaning of its predecessor.

Trabius 14:09, 26 September 2008 (PDT)

So the Passive Voice of the Above, would be: "The store was run to by Ryuuji." While Active would be: "Ryuuji ran to the store." Is that what I'm hearing? If so, then by all means make those sentences into active :). As for changing was running to ran, if you think it's an improvement, then go for it. Personally, I'm all for the changes.

--Krikit 20:50, 26 September 2008 (PDT)

Trabius, I think everything you said is true. However, novels in English seem to have an exception: all past tense sentences in a novel take place in the present (from the readers perspective). So both ‘was running’ and ‘ran’ are still ‘actions that are still in effect’.

Here’s what I mean: Ryuuji was running to the store. When he got there, he bought an apple. (Passive)

Ryuuji ran to the store. When he got there, he bought an apple. (Active)

Same meaning, active voice sounds better.

Don’t worry guys, I only eliminate ‘to be’ verbs if they are obviously better suited in the active voice. Yes, many times the passive voice is the more logical choice.

---

Almost forgot,

I kind of understand what this sentence from the synopsis is trying to say, but it could be clearer:

"and so she lives with the weak-bodied Jin making alot of tumultuous noise."

And do you prefer 'Ojou-sama' over 'school idol'?

Akirasav 9:03, 27 September 2008 (PDT)

Akira, Feel free to change passive to active, but I want to clear up what I meant by 'still in effect'. I meant that using progressive conjugation, which follows the form 'is/was (verb)+ing', maintains one point of temporal reference more explicitly. Using a similar example, 1) 'Ryuuji was running to the store. Suddenly, a cat appeared, leaping out from behind a nearby box and taking him by surprise.'

2)'Ryuuji ran to the store. Suddenly, a cat appeared, leaping out from behind a nearby box and taking him by surprise.'

Contrasting your above examples, the 'when he got there' indicates a change in time that renders the use of 'was running' totally obsolete because the second event occurs after the first, and so I would agree with you 100% that the second line with 'ran' is more appropriate. However, in my example, the two events occur in the same present time frame, which is why I would prefer 'was running'. Although line 2 can still be understood, it could be misconstrued while line 1 makes it clear that Ryuuji is on his way to the store rather than already at the store.

All in all, the 'what' and the 'when' determine whether a sentence should use progressive/present participle or plain past.

And yeah, I know my example sentences are horrible...

Trabius 10:22, 27 September 2008 (PDT)