Hello I want to know that whether the following statement grammatically and semantically correct or not
ceremony has been decided to be held tomorrow
here it is in passive voice and we are not caring about who is conducting the ceremony.
Asked
Active
Viewed 87 times
1
-
1Possibly a dummy subject would would sound better. i.e. It has been decided that the ceremony is to (should) be held tomorrow. – Cascabel_StandWithUkraine_ Mar 01 '21 at 16:08
-
I can live with "The ceremony will be held tomorrow." However, the original screams out that the ceremony planners are hiding behind the passive voice. Remember that "A good time was had by all" describes a party that was not much fun. – Yosef Baskin Mar 01 '21 at 16:10
-
1@ Cascabel thank you for paraphrasing it. – Geethanjali Kotaru Mar 01 '21 at 16:15
-
@ yosef My intention is to hide the planners. So is it grammatically correct – Geethanjali Kotaru Mar 01 '21 at 16:16
-
Very relevant: Why is this ungrammatical? 'A new cd player was wanted by Ed'. Certain verbs (and as here, catenations) resist passivisation. 'The match was decided on penalties' is fine, but 'The ceremony has been decided to be held tomorrow' is outlandish. I'd mark it wrong in an essay.One of Cascabel's or especially Yosef's (admittedly with some loss of info) versions is required. – Edwin Ashworth Mar 01 '21 at 16:24
-
Does that mean "held" resist passivisation. let me give you in context that – Geethanjali Kotaru Mar 01 '21 at 16:56
-
I think Edwin means that decide to hold resists passivisation. – Kate Bunting Mar 01 '21 at 17:03
-
"ceremony" isn't the direct object of "decide", so it doesn't make sense to passivise it: the object of decide is the clause "to hold the ceremony tomorrow" (i.e. they decide to hold the ceremony, they don't decide the ceremony). It's fine to say "the ceremony was arranged for tomorrow". Or in another context "the result was decided for tomorrow" (=They decided tomorrow's result). – Stuart F Mar 01 '21 at 17:58