Skip to main content

future - Is this correct: "Water will be being drunk by Michael"?


I started with "Michael is drinking water", which I could convert to "Water is being drunk by Michael", which I could change to the past tense as "Water was being drunk by Michael".


That leads me to believe that I could change "Water is being drunk by Michael" to the future tense as: "Water will be being drunk by Michael". Am I right?


(In case somebody suggests "Water will be drunk by Michael", I believe that has a different connotation because I would derive it from "Michael drinks water" to "Water is drunk by Michael" and then change the tense to future to get "Water will be drunk by Michael".)



Answer



Syntactically, yes, the sentence is correct. It's the Passive Future Progressive.


The direct derivation is:



Michael will be drinking water. >>> Water will be being drunk by Michael.



But the real question is, what do you want to mean by it, and in what situation?


You would have to be referring to a particular moment or point in time in the future. As in the Active Voice:



Fifteen minutes from now, Michael will be drinking water.



And to change it to the Passive Voice, the Subject would have to be worth emphasizing as well:



Fifteen minutes from now, the drugged water will be being drunk by Michael.



Compare with (and this is the direct derivation as well):



Michael will drink water. >>> Water will be drunk by Michael.



In short, if you're just trying your hand at Passive construction, it might be good practice. But it's always better to learn structure together with the meaning and application.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more