Anonymous  +  420776 Tue, 18 Sep 07 10:27 PM Hi there! There is a sentence: We weren't explained to why he had done such terrible things. And here is the question: is to optional or incorrect ? Can we get rid of it in sentences like the one above ? Thanks in advance Anonymous

	Yankee  +  420780 Tue, 18 Sep 07 10:37 PM Hi Anon No, the word 'to' is not optional. However, even with the word 'to', the sentence is extremely awkward.  It's not a natural-sounding passive sentence. This version of the passive would be much better: Why he had done such terrible things wasn't explained to us. Yankee Joined on Sat, Apr 15 2006 Connecticut, USA Veteran Member 6,500 Amy "You can't depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus." - Mark Twain Passive Sentences

	Clive  +  420781 Tue, 18 Sep 07 10:39 PM Hi, There is a sentence: We weren't explained to why he had done such terrible things. And here is the question: is to optional or incorrect ? Can we get rid of it in sentences like the one above ? You are not using the passive correctly here. You can't say 'We weren't explained . . . ' You need to say 'Something was not explained to us', thus -  Why he had done such terrible things was not explained to us. Best wishes, Clive Clive Joined on Thu, Oct 28 2004 Canada Veteran Member 29,628 El tango argentino es un pensamiento triste que se puede bailar (The tango argentino is a sad thought which can be danced) Enrique Santos Discépolo

	CalifJim  +  421169 Wed, 19 Sep 07 06:48 PM We weren't explained to why he had done such terrible things. This seems to be an incorrect version of the following sentence: We were given no explanation as to why he had done such terrible things. I'm not sure that explanation as to is the best grammar, but people do use it.  explained as to or explained to, as used in the original sentence, are not used, however. CJ CalifJim Joined on Mon, Aug 2 2004 California Veteran Member 22,415 "There are no facts, only interpretations" - Nietzsche Grammar

	Cool Breeze  +  421259 Wed, 19 Sep 07 09:46 PM  Anonymous wrote: There is a sentence: We weren't explained to why he had done such terrible things. Your sentence is incorrect. The structure you are using is possible with some verbs but not with explain. There is no rule or reason for this, English just isn't the most logical of languages. It is sometimes possible to use either the object or the indirect object as the grammatical subject of a passive clause: Money was given [to] us. We were given money. If a verb takes a preposition, it must be included in the passive clause: We were laughed at. Explain is followed by to if there is an indirect object: Explain to everybody what he meant. You have written a grammatically similar sentence but unfortunately it is not possible to use explain in this way. Your sentence is grammatically correctly formed but since no one uses explain that way, it must be considered wrong. CB Cool Breeze Joined on Fri, Apr 7 2006 Senior Member 3,978 "I hope you'll all live to be 150 years old - and the last voice you hear is mine!" Frank Sinatra on stage in Oslo, Norway, 28 September 1991 Verbs, Prepositions, Clauses, Direct Objects, Indirect Objects

	Yankee  +  421263 Wed, 19 Sep 07 09:53 PM Hi Jim I saw the main problem in the fact that we always use the word 'to' with the verb 'explain' when we want to mention the person on the receiving end of an explanation.. In other words, you can say "He explained the problem to me" but you cannot say "He explained me the problem".  That is unlike this pattern:  "He gave the information to me." and "He gave me the information."  In this type of sentence, you can use either 'me' (I) or 'information' to start the passive sentence:  I was given the information -OR- The information was given to me. EDIT: Thanks, CB.  I didn't see your post before I posted. Yankee Verbs, Passive Sentences