Skip to main content
9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jan 21, 2017 at 7:28 vote accept Shannak
Jan 19, 2017 at 20:19 comment added StoneyB on hiatus @Shannak Your first were married is a passive, past tense, your second is a predication (BE + predicate complement), past tense.
Jan 19, 2017 at 8:55 comment added Shannak @StoneyB could you help me with these: “They were married by the priest" and “They were married and happy.” can we use your description with these two sentences?
Jan 18, 2017 at 23:49 comment added verbose @StoneyB I'm not sure your footnote clarifies matters. The parson married John and Susan yesterday is active voice, after all. My father-in-law is a priest, and my mother-in-law once informed me that he had married his godchild the previous week.
Jan 18, 2017 at 19:10 comment added Lambie @StoneyB Never mind. My main point was not that. I felt you were using an incorrect example to explain this usage. I just think my explanation is simple and does not entail: my keys were lost, where lost is a passive verb, and I gave several examples of similar uses where there is not the possibility of reading the verb as a passive. It annoys me that people downvote (I am not saying it was you) when they really are clueless about grammar.
Jan 18, 2017 at 18:56 comment added StoneyB on hiatus @Lambie No; but Jack and Susan are married as a consequence of being married by the parson. I have added a footnote to make this clear.
Jan 18, 2017 at 18:54 history edited StoneyB on hiatus CC BY-SA 3.0
added 394 characters in body
Jan 18, 2017 at 18:47 comment added Lambie My keys were lost yesterday (by me) is a passive verb. They are married describes a condition. I lost my keys, my keys were lost. BUT NOT: I married him, he was married by me. To be plus a past participle describes a condition. It is not an action verb as in I lost my keys yesterday.
Jan 18, 2017 at 18:24 history answered StoneyB on hiatus CC BY-SA 3.0