R: Re: preferred voices?

Marcus Smith wrote:

> nicole perrin wrote:
>
> >Yesterday we were reviewing the passive voice in my French class, and
> >one of the points the teacher made quite emphatically is that the active
> >voice is preferred.  I know that this is also the case with English,
> >although I could never understand it.
>
> Me either.  I use the passive quite often, but I know other English
> speakers who have claimed that they *never* use it.  I think "never" is
too
> strong a word, but I must admit that I've never heard those people use it,
> so they could very well be right.
*Never*? I find that a language without the passive voice wouldn't be so
neat as one wich includes it. It allows you to change the prospective, to
describe the action in a new way. The passive voice is lively present in
Italian, and I can't figure out people not using it. I think people can use
it *much* more than the subjunctive mood, which in Italian is really
powerful (but not used anymore by many -low instructed- speakers).

> >   The only explanation I've ever
> >gotten is that it's not as powerful as active but I don't really buy
> >that.
>
> That doesn't really make much sense to me.  What is "powerful" supposed to
> mean?
I find the passive voice powerful as the active. Ergative langs use passive
much more than active (okay, okay, that's not exactly the same thing!).

Luca