Studia Islandica - 01.06.1994, Blaðsíða 115

113
Lyons also discusses the limits imposed by the narrow
traditional grammatical definition and the possibility of a
more functional definition of “passivity”
The possibility of conflict between ‘the form of the passive voice’
and its ‘function’ (the conversion, or transformation, of a sentence
in which the subject is represented as ‘acting’ into a sentence in
which it is represented as ‘being acted upon’, or ‘suffering the
effects of the action’) is well recognized in the theory and practice
of traditional grammarians. (Lyons 1968:377)
In keeping with the definition proposed here and our
emphasis on function, it seems justifiable enough to
describe as “passive” a conversion or transformation
through translation whereby the subject which had
been doing the acting in the original has lost its own
active force or is even being acted upon in the translat-
ed version. In the saga translations under examination this
may occur where direct simple tenses in the Old Icelandic
are replaced with compound tenses in English using the
verb to be plus a participle, or through other changes reduc-
ing the amount or intensity of meaning conveyed per lin-
guistic unit.
Thus, although there may be few instances where a
phrase such as Bolli drap Kjartan is translated through
what has been traditionally referred to as a shift to the pas-
sive voice such as “Kjartan was killed by Bolli”, there are
plenty of instances where a sentence such as þeir Halldórr
rœða nú um með sér, hversu at skal orka (166) becomes
“Halldór and his men were trying to make up their minds
as to how they ought to go about it” (A 144). Instead of
Þorgerðr svarar máli hans ok sagði eigi spara þurfa at
vinna ógrunsamliga at við Bolla (167) we have “It was
Thorgerd who gave answer to him, saying there was no call
for not making sure that Bolli was completely done for” (A
145).