grammar mistakes

Passive voice is not in the least bit awkward to me, and the use of the passive tense above is awkward because it defeats the whole purpose of passive voice to start with.

If you are trying to say something that is not well expressed through passive tense but insist on using passive tense then it will, of course, be awkward.

There are many situations in which not using passive tense is awkward.

e.g.

I came home to find that the window was broken.

"the window was broken"

You do not know who did it or even if a person did it at all. In this case passive tense makes sense, and not using passive tense ranges from awkward to simply incorrect.

"someone broke the window" might simply be false.

I think you are right, McTag, it does mean something different. The revised editions don't have those rules; instead the only spelling rule I can find is in Section V., reminder #10 - Use Orthodox Spelling. Those reminders are on the Amazon website's 4th edition, but not in Bartleby's 1st edition. I was <hanging head> too lazy to write them out and couldn't cut & paste, so I tried to point you all to Amazon, sigh. Possibly the "to-day" and "some time" rules that Strunk came up with were correct in 1919?

As to the passive voice -- I like it in moderation. I don't want all active voice since it makes me anxious. I want it all mixed up. Anyway, I have a hard time deciding if I'm writing in active or passive style. I just write what I write and I'm not nearly as fussy as I used to be. (Can you believe it?)

Excellent quote, btw, that Churchill, what a guy!

"When I got home, I noticed that the window was broken."

No passive, no confusion...

Wy, that is passive.

"The window was broken" is passive while "I noticed" isn''t.

oops.

Craven, I'm not too sure if you are not on thin ice here.
I read your sentence and I could not decide whether it was a passive or whether "broken" was simply an adjective used in that way.

And that is why I say grammar schmammar. It can ***k with your brain and I think there are more important things to worry about than parsing sentences.

(What am I saying? May I be forgiven. Oops, another passive crept in!)

Did anyone know that "I wish I were a better grammarian" is a volitional subjunctive?

McTag, you said in no uncertain terms that 'grammar schmammar. It can ***k with your brain and I think there are more important things to worry about than parsing sentences. '

Ah but if that is so, you would not be coming and nosing round a grammar topic in an English forum... or would you? Personally I think life's too short for macrame, football, and pet cats, but I don't go to the web forums (fora) of their aficionados.

The window was broken by McTag. is passive.

When I was writing the Collins English Dictionary we did make a new category for adjectival use of other things like verb participles. Modifiers, we called them. It hasn't really caught on, but there is a case for them. The def of an adjective may rest on its being modifiable in its turn - a partly closed window, a long-running debate. Or maybe not.

I'm just thinking random thoughts here. Just muddying the waters a bit.

I wish I was in Dixie.....

( You can have quite a lot of merriment with grammar, when it's taken to extremes.
Wasn't it Winston Churchill who said, on the fairly arbitrary rule of not ending a sentence with a conjunction, "That, sir, is the kind of thing up with which I will not put.")

"I wish I was in Dixie" is technically not a volitional subjuctive. How's that for messing with your head, heh heh. Go figure, I say. However, I am all for some strict grammar merriment, and perhaps it will help our friend who started this topic. "I insist that McTag brush up on strict grammar" is a mandative subjunctive. Drom has me on a subjunctive kick, I think. Also, I completely dis-agree with Strunk's hyphenating. It's just wrong, IMHO. Oops, there I go with the internet language again...by the way....this style of writing....with the dot dot dots...is the copyright of Larry King.

I thought Herb Caen was the maven of three-dot journalism...

Once again, Larry tells us lies, just like his supposed friendship with Sandy Kofax.

Nosing around, nosing around indeed! Contributing, is what I'm doing.

I am fascinated by words, but I don't know all the rules of why something is so. I don't much care to learn the names of things like a true seeker after the truth would. Things I have forgotten, like the meaning of iambic pentameter or different subdivisions of the subjunctive, don't worry me. I am an amateur, do I hear dilettante? I just like well-written prose.

Y'all have a good week, now.

Egads, is that a freakin' double negative!!! LOL ... and that would mean, uh, Craven sits on thin ice?

We're not getting fusty, I hope with grammar. Poor Thirsty... drops a bitsy bomb and then flees the scene. Sort of a forum terrorist.

I will say one more time that the current version of stupid old Strunk DOES NOT ask for a spelling of to-day. I don't know why that bum, Bartleby, wouldn't just give us the fourth edition.

Btw -- I am shocked & assume that the dot dot dot thingie regarding Larry King is a joke, right?

Piffka, Larry King is a walking joke, I was just hopping on the train there.

Pooh, Piff, take out the negatives and boil it down and it says CRAVEN, YOU ARE WRONG!

But I was not sure if he was wrong or not. So hedging my bets, and not engaging I think in an error of double negative, I took refuge in an example of good old British mealy-mouthed equivocation.

But Clary informs me after all that I am wrong. Well, so be it, I subjunctively defer.

So Craven really was wrong about the passive? See, I get them all mixed up!

Clary said you're wrong about being interested in silly grammar? Hmmm. What is it called when one is defensive of grammar? (Poor Thirsty... as I said, LOOK at what you've started!)

I never wished I were in Dixie!

"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on." Isn't that a Churchill quote. Omigod, it ends with a preposition!

McTag,

Your double negative was a correct usage of the double negative (which is not always wrong).

As to "broken" being an adjective in that sentence you have a point. But I think it's a point about how parts of speech can be confusing or have dual purpose. Since the sentence had a verb, "broken" doesn't have to be a verb. But it can be. And if it's a verb the structure was passive. Looks like a pick and choose situation.

I hate to disagree with folks, no really I do, but Winnie would never, NEVAH, have used "pants" in that sense.

Some of us got here before Larry....