• N. V Solovei
  • S. M. Mazur
  • I. V. Letunovska
Keywords: passive predication, grammatical category, pragmatics, predictiveness, agent


The article examines the pragmatic features of passive voice because the categories of the voice reveal a direct connection with one of the central notions of pragmatics (the Speaker). A pragmatic analysis of the passive voice allows to identify shades of meanings of the passive voice in various situations and gives an answer to the question why it is used by the speaker. In sentences with a passive perspective, the role of the main information center of the utterance is played by the noun phrase or its substitute, which occupies the position of a grammatical subject – a semantic object. Noncategorical ways of expressing the centripetal direction of an action of the passive perspective of the main predication of the English sentence include, first of all, lexical units – verbal derivatives of the cardinal parts of speech. Verbal nouns with different verbalizers convey a passive perspective of the main predication of relational and relationally determinative sentences. That is, non-grammatical methods are variants of the passive perspective formulation of sentences through passive predication, the pragmatic significance of which, as in the case of grammatical methods, is determined by the subordination of the speaker’s intention. Thus, in addition to the grammatical passive, the passive perspective of the sentence expressed in non-grammatical ways can be characteristic of a number of different types of predication. Analyzed types of passive predication refer to nongrammatical (noncategorical) ways of expressing the passive perspective of a sentence. Common features for sentences, the passive perspective of which is represented by a grammatical (categorical) passive and other (lexical) means, are: the absence of an agent (performer) of the action in the position of a grammatical subject, the centripetal orientation of the process expressed by predicate words and the affinity of the grammatical subject, which is evidence of an identical character of the relationships they express.


1. Соловей Н.В. Пассивная перспектива английского предложения : дис. … канд. филол. наук : 10.02.04 / Киевский государственный университет. Киев, 1988. 179 с.
2. Соловей Н.В., Чехет Т.Э. Прагматика залога в высказывании. Прагматика и логика дискурса : cборник научн. трудов. Ижевск, 1991. С. 59–66.
3. Медведева Л.М. Части речи и залог. Киев : Вища школа, 1983. 144 с.
4. Mathesius V. A Functional Analysis of Present Day English on a General Linguistic Basis. The Hague-Paris : Monton, 1975, 228 p.
5. Махачкова Е. Пять типов пассивной предикации в чешском языке . Проблемы теории грамматического залога. Ленинград : Наука, 1978. С. 220–223.
6. Бархударов Л.С. Очерки по морфологии современного английского языка. Москва : Высшая школа, 1975. 156 с.
7. Есперсен О. Философия грамматики. Москва : Изд-во иностранной литературы, 1958. 404 с.
8. Виноградов В.В. Русский язык (грамматическое учение о слове). Москва : Высшая школа, 1972. 614 с.
9. Аверьянова Н.А. Некоторые типы ретроактивных конструкций в современном английском языке. Межвузовский сборник научных трудов. Ленинград, 1986. С. 3–10.
10. Bruce I. Theory and Concepts for Academic Purposes. Palgrave Macmillan, 2013. 227 p.
11. Thompson D. Getting at the passive: Functions of passive-types in English. PhD thesis. University of Glasgo, 2012, 168 p. URL:
12. Клюшина А.М. Средства выражения пассивности в английском языке в синхронии и диахронии : дис. …канд. филол. наук : 10.02.04 / Поволжская государственная социально-гуманитарная академия. Самара, 2012. 195 c.
13. Cambridge Dictionary. URL:
14. Runcie M. Oxford Collocations Dictionary for students of English. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2010, 897 p.
How to Cite
Solovei, N. V., Mazur, S. M., & Letunovska, I. V. (2020). VARIABILITY IN EXPRESSING СЕNTRIPETAL DIRECTION OF ACTION IN A SENTENCE. Bulletin of Zaporizhzhia National University. Philological Sciences, 2(1), 36-42.