how to explain the usage of the ergative verb?

Share on Facebook

Marius Hancu

#504946 Thu, 24 Apr 08 06:40 PM

ganesh77
The usage "turnover was increased" doesn't sound right because it suggests there is an agent actively involved in increasing turnover, which is what companies try to avoid.

OK, yes, this is the only reason to avoid that in this context.

It's not valid for increasing other parameters.

Marius Hancu

Joined on Wed, Apr 26 2006

Montreal, Canada

Veteran Member (11,641)

Verbs

ganesh77

#504948 Thu, 24 Apr 08 06:48 PM

Marius

A thousand thank yous for affirming that this usage doesn't work because of the particular context it is embedded in. That's something tangible to explain to the trainees.

ganesh77

Joined on Mon, Mar 10 2008

Vancouver, Bangkok

Junior Member (52)

The principle which now replies I don't know what was there a hundred years back, the same principle also says that it was unaffected when the whole universe was destroyed....

Verbs

Goodman

#504950 Thu, 24 Apr 08 06:58 PM

Hi Ganesh77,
<<>> The sentence "Last year, turnover was increased by 20%" is called a 'common mistake' in my course book.

I just need to throw in my 2 cents….

As already explained “turnover” (as in employee turnover) is a noun. If a company for some unknown reasons was unable to retain the employees it has hired, that’s commonly known as a “turnover” in the US. I see nothing wrong in this passive sentence. I know, you insist that its “passive status” is wrong. But in my opinion, it’s perfectly grammatically and legally correct. (nod) Nodding

Goodman

Joined on Mon, Nov 7 2005

Calif. USA

Senior Member (2,981)

The name says it all!

Nouns, Passive sentences, Verbs

ganesh77

#504952 Thu, 24 Apr 08 07:06 PM

Yet I can't imagine a situation in which two managers are sitting down having a coffee and one turns to the other and says, "you know, last year turnover was increased by 20%". I can imagine someone saying, "you know, last year turnover increased by 20%".

ganesh77

Verbs

Avangi

#504956 Thu, 24 Apr 08 07:30 PM

Hi again ganesh,

I urge you to look at

http://www.flinders.edu.au/SLC/Brochures/active_passive.pdf

Look at page 2, Middle Voice

This seems to be at odds with what you're telling us your textbook says, and seems to suggest a source of the confusion about the "no agent accepted" controversy.

I'm sure there's more pertinent stuff available out there, but as I said previously, this is new to me.

Best wishes, - A.

Avangi

Joined on Mon, Nov 19 2007

Senior Member (2,470)

". . . le plaisir delicieux et toujours nouveau d'une occupation inutile." - Henri de Regnier

Verbs

Grammar Geek

#504959 Thu, 24 Apr 08 07:37 PM

Okay, several points here.

Yes, employee turnover is something we try to avoid. If you recall, one of the reasons to use the passive is when you don't want to identify the agent - in other words, stupid management decisions. Avangi's example was perfect.

Next, while employee turnover is a bad thing, inventory turnover is a good thing!

Through an aggressive marketing program and retailer incentives, inventory turnover was increased by 20%.

There's nothing wrong with that.

I think the "rule" in your grammar book is wrong, and you can say simply that your conversations with native speakers affirmed your belief in that. What they need to work on instead is understand the difference between the transitive and ergative aspects of some of these verbs, and make sure they are using them the right way for their intended meaning.

Grammar Geek

Joined on Tue, Jan 10 2006

Pennsylvania, USA

Veteran Member (14,793)

Barbara, who answers in American English.

Conversations, Difference between, Grammar, Verbs

Avangi

#504967 Thu, 24 Apr 08 08:09 PM

Here I go beating a dead horse one more time.

When you approach the ergative verb issue from the point of view of active voice, passive voice and middle voice (instead of transitive verb and intransitive verb) you come face to face with the "agent" business.

active I broke the window (I am the agent who broke the window)

passive The window was broken by me (I am the agent)

passive The window was broken (the agent is somebody - unspecified but clearly implied)

"middle voice" The window broke (there is no agent, nor is one implied, nor may one be accepted) designed to please management? ?

"middle voice" The window broke by me (this version is not possible - it's wrong - it's incorrect - nobody would ever say it) management is still safe

ganesh - Would you entertain the possibility that the discussion of agents in your class book may have had something to do with this, rather than agents conspiring to make workers leave?

Very best wishes - A.

Avangi

Verbs

Goodman

#504970 Thu, 24 Apr 08 08:16 PM

Ganesh77,
This is quite an interesting discussion. Your reference book obviously either steered you wrong or somewhere there is a misinterpretaion. (:)) Smile
<<<>>>I can imagine someone saying, "you know, last year turnover increased by 20%".

Yes, you can! Let’s look at this sentence structure from a different angle.

^{Last week, the price of gas jumped 20 % from a week before}. From glancing at it, it looks almost the same as your example. However, this is a valid active structure which is completely different than your. You may have attempted to make it an active sentence but it just does not work the way you had it. GG made a very good point, in passive structure, we don’t have to have an agent, like “stupid management”. So ‘was increased” implied an unspoken cause. But if you omit "was", the structure is invalid.