Be tanished (x)/ tarnished(0) in this sentence.

Question

"Blue Girls"~~~~For I could tell you a story which is true;I know a woman with a terrible tongue.Blear eyes fallen from blue,All her perfections tarnished -- yet it is not longSince she was lovelier than any of you.____Above is the poem.Question of the poem) The verb 'tarnish' in the fourth stanza can be passivized into 'be tarnished'. The passive form of 'tarnish', however, is not allowed in the fourth stanza. Explain why 'be tarnished' is unacceptable here.The question maker answers below:In the last stanza, the verb 'tarnish' is an intransitive verb, not a transitive one.This is so since there is no distinction between the causer of tarnishing as thesentence subject and the causee being tarnished by the causer as the sentenceobject. The agent assuming the role of causer is not found in this context. Thissituation makes it impossible to construct the given sentence into transitive formand transform it into passive.Q) What is your opinion about the question and the answer from the question maker?

Clive · Accepted Answer

Hi,

I just view 'tarnished' as an adjective describing 'perfections'.

Clive

Moon7296 · Answer

Hi.

Oh, that's really simple and powerful view

.

Q1) Is your view the same as an adjective frightened in 'He is frightened'?

Q2) You mean 'tarnished' is not used as a verb(intransitive), but an adjective? (Then, where is the be verb in the sentence?)

Clive · Answer

Hi,

Oh, that's really simple and powerful view

.

Q1) Is your view the same as an adjective frightened in 'He is frightened'? Yes, that's also an adjective.

Q2) You mean 'tarnished' is not used as a verb(intransitive), but an adjective? Yes

(Then, where is the be verb in the sentence?) There isn't a verb 'be' here.

The poet is saying

I know a woman with a terrible tongue,

I know a woman with blear eyes fallen from blue,

I know a woman with all her perfections tarnished.

The poem is written in a poetical style of language.

Clive

Moon7296 · Answer

Ah..

The point is the poem is written in a poetical style, so 'tarnished' is used as an adjective and it has no be verb, doesn't it?

Then if we don't consider poetical style, how do we differentiate verbs having two characters: transitive and intransitive?

Do you usually use the verbs like this?

1. He tarnished something

2. Something was tarnished (by him)

3. I broke my leg.

4. My leg was broken (by a car accident)

5. My leg broke.

Clive · Answer

Hi,

The point is the poem is written in a poetical style, so 'tarnished' is used as an adjective and it has no be verb, doesn't it?

Correct

Then if we don't consider poetical style, how do we differentiate verbs having two characters: transitive and intransitive?

Do you usually use the verbs like this? Yes, these examples are all OK.

1. He tarnished something

2. Something was tarnished (by him)

3. I broke my leg.

4. My leg was broken (by a car accident)

5. My leg broke.

Clive

Moon7296 · Answer

Thank you Clive.

When I want to use verbs used both transitive or intrastive, can I think like this:

when I want to add something: the reason or cause like 'by~' in #2 and #4, the passive form is better; and if the reason or cause is not important we just say like #5 or #1(He tarnished ~~something~~)?

Clive · Answer

Hi,

When I want to use verbs used both transitive or intrastive, can I think like this:

when I want to add something: the reason or cause like 'by~' in #2 and #4, the passive form is better; and if the reason or cause is not important we just say like #5 or #1(He tarnished something)?

It's usually considered better to use active voice.

eg Tom robbed the bank.

It's simpler and more direct.

The focus here is on Tom.

Compare the passive voice.

eg The bank was robbed (by Tom).

Here, the focus is on the bank. We may not even know or care who robbed it, in which case the 'by phrase' is omitted.

Clive

Moon7296 · Answer

Hi,

I'm sorry to keep asking.

This is the definition of the verb tarnish from my dictionary:

If a metal tarnishes or if something tarnishes it, it becomes stained and loses its brightness.

To cut them into two, there are two versions: #1 a metal tarnishes and #2 sth tarnishes a metal.

According to your last answer, #2 is better because 'It's simpler and more direct'.

Q1) I think there are some verbs having two features like #1 and #2 which is a little unique, isn't it?

Q2) Do you happen to know some of those verbs?

Q3) To me, it looks like #1 can be changed into 'A metal is tarnished by something'. Is it not?

Clive · Answer

Hi,

I'm sorry to keep asking.

This is the definition of the verb tarnish from my dictionary:

If a metal tarnishes or if something tarnishes it, it becomes stained and loses its brightness.

To cut them into two, there are two versions: #1 a metal tarnishes and #2 sth tarnishes a metal.

According to your last answer, #2 is better because 'It's simpler and more direct'. No. Neither of the bold verbs is passive voice. They are both active voice, and thus both are 'direct'.

Q1) I think there are some verbs having two features like #1 and #2 which is a little unique, isn't it?

Q2) Do you happen to know some of those verbs? I'm sure there are lots. eg soften, harden, break.

Q3) To me, it looks like #1 can be changed into 'A metal is tarnished by something'. Is it not? Yes. That, of course, is passive voice.

Clive

Moon7296 · Answer

Thank you very much for answering every question.

This would be the last question

.

I think #1 a metal tarnished and #2 a metal was tarnished have the same meaning but the different voice, don't they?

And I think this is really interesting if #2 is not used with #3 by something. I find there's no reason to use #2 if something that caused the metal tarnished(#3) does not appear in the sentence.

Be tanished (x)/ tarnished(0) in this sentence.

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions