1

The question concerns changing of the form and place of the direct object and prepositional objects in a sentence after it was reverted to the passive voice. For example let's consider the following couples of active/passive sentences:

1. He sent for the doctor. 
2. The doctor was sent for.

and

3. He sent her to a hospital. 
4. She was sent to a hospital.

Now let's consider the combined grammar structure

5. He sent her to a hospital for the doctor.

How do the passive voices look like here? What form do the objects ( to a hospital, for the doctor, her) assume there?

Will it be correct to write like

6. Her was sent to a hospital for the doctor.
7. The doctor was sent for to a hospital.
8. The doctor was sent for to her.
9. The doctor was sent for to a hospital to her.

How should be modify these sentences in case they aren't correct?

1 Answer 1

2

Note that in this answer, I am using the word patient to refer to the noun at the start of a passive voice sentence.

Sentences 1 and two use the phrasal verb send for with the doctor as object/patient, whereas sentences 3 and 4 simply use the verb send, with her/she as the object/patient.

In the passive voice sentences, 6 is almost right: as in sentence 4, when her becomes the patient, it becomes she.

She was sent to a hospital for the doctor.

The other sentences don't work because she was sent to the hospital, not the doctor, so you can't use the prepositional phrase to the hospital if she does not appear in the sentence.

6
  • Thanks a lot. But if "He sent for the doctor to a hospital" is correct, why can't it be revert to the passive like as "The doctor was sent for to a hospital" where "sent for" is a phrasal verb as well?
    – xyz
    Dec 7, 2021 at 11:06
  • 2
    The doctor was sent for to the hospital means that the hospital asked the doctor to go there. The meaning of He sent her to a hospital for the doctor is unclear. Did he send her at the doctor's request, or so that she could see the doctor there? Dec 7, 2021 at 11:36
  • "the hospital asked the doctor to go there". Shouldn't it expressed by preposition by (not to)?? The doctor was sent for by the hospital
    – xyz
    Dec 7, 2021 at 13:00
  • 1
    Well, yes, that's how I would normally say it; but to me, the only logical meaning of the doctor was sent for to a hospital would be the doctor was summoned and asked to go to a hospital. Dec 7, 2021 at 14:53
  • 1
    @xyz "the doctor at the hospital was sent for".
    – JavaLatte
    Dec 8, 2021 at 11:42

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .