+0
Hi. I have a question.

#1 He made her attend the meeting.
#2 She was made to attend the meeting.

I know both right, but what I don't understand is why "to" is added to passive sentense.
Please give me your comments as if I'm a beginning ESL student.

Thank you for your comments in advence.

Keiichi
Comments  
There is no particular reason. To is never omitted after a passive finite verb; that's the way it is:

I saw him walk yesterday.

He was seen to walk yesterday.

CB
<<<He was seen to walk yesterday>>

I believe it should take a gerund, "walking" instead of the infinitve "to walk".

He was seen [walking to school] with Mary but no one saw him again since then. walking to school] - is a participle clause which adds more information to the sentence.

There are no known rules to my knowledge. A security system has been put in my house to protect my family from protential intruders
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Goodman<<<He was seen to walk yesterday>>

I believe it should take a gerund, "walking" instead of the infinitve "to walk".

There isn't a single verb in English that can be followed by an infinitive in the active but requires a gerund in the passive.

CB
Gerund would suggest that someone saw a part of his walking and the walking is still happening, whereas the infinite suggests that someone saw the whole event and the walking is stopped now.
ZeroxGerund would suggest that someone saw a part of his walking and the walking is still happening, whereas the infinite suggests that someone saw the whole event and the walking is stopped now.

I know that view has been expressed by quite a few grammarians. In my view they are just trying to make English more exact than it really is. If I see one of these sentences:

He was seen to walk in the street, or:

He was seen walking in the street,

there really is no knowing if the person saw saw part of the walking or all of it. I know many grammarians agree with me - we'll just have to disagree, I think. Anyone versed in English literature and conversational English will have noticed that even though in some cases what you say is true, there are countless examples to the contrary. I'm not blaming English here, though, because no distinction can be made in many other languages either.

CB
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
If there is any grammarian here, please correct me if I am wrong.

Given the 2 choices, I would say # 2 is more accpetable.
When some one is seen, even he is not doing anything but sitting down on a park bench, 'sitting" is still an act. So the logical deductive reasoning is
"he was seen sitting there on the park bench..." is correc and has no bearing on whether the act was completed or not. "Was seen..." already took care of the tense.
# 1 looks grammatically correct but it sure sounds awkward to my ear.

1) He was seen to walk in the street,
2) He was seen walking in the street,
Cool BreezeTo is never omitted after a passive finite verb; that's the way it is:
Thank you for your comment. I should understand as is.

Keiichi