Why “be dealt cards” rather than “be dealing cards”?What is the proper use of the present progressive form, especially of “to have”?Reference Time and Event Time in the Pr. Progressive tenseWhat are the viewpoint and lexical aspects of the following two “stand”?Repeated actions and the past progressiveDo tenses agree in: “”I don't understand why the service was so slow.."Why the use of past perfect hereHow to use Would Rather?Unreal uses of past tenses “Would you rather we took the bus?” vs “Would you rather take the bus?”says rather more than is strictly certainPresent perfect simple vs present perfect progressive

Is this apparent Class Action settlement a spam message?

Why Were Madagascar and New Zealand Discovered So Late?

How to write papers efficiently when English isn't my first language?

What is the opposite of 'gravitas'?

Gears on left are inverse to gears on right?

How do I rename a Linux host without needing to reboot for the rename to take effect?

Return the Closest Prime Number

Do the temporary hit points from the Battlerager barbarian's Reckless Abandon stack if I make multiple attacks on my turn?

How can I get through very long and very dry, but also very useful technical documents when learning a new tool?

What is paid subscription needed for in Mortal Kombat 11?

Failed to fetch jessie backports repository

A particular customize with green line and letters for subfloat

Why, precisely, is argon used in neutrino experiments?

Trouble understanding the speech of overseas colleagues

Is there a korbon needed for conversion?

What happens if you roll doubles 3 times then land on "Go to jail?"

Short story about space worker geeks who zone out by 'listening' to radiation from stars

Is oxalic acid dihydrate considered a primary acid standard in analytical chemistry?

Would this custom Sorcerer variant that can only learn any verbal-component-only spell be unbalanced?

Go Pregnant or Go Home

How to safely derail a train during transit?

How does Loki do this?

Term for the "extreme-extension" version of a straw man fallacy?

How did Doctor Strange see the winning outcome in Avengers: Infinity War?



Why “be dealt cards” rather than “be dealing cards”?


What is the proper use of the present progressive form, especially of “to have”?Reference Time and Event Time in the Pr. Progressive tenseWhat are the viewpoint and lexical aspects of the following two “stand”?Repeated actions and the past progressiveDo tenses agree in: “”I don't understand why the service was so slow.."Why the use of past perfect hereHow to use Would Rather?Unreal uses of past tenses “Would you rather we took the bus?” vs “Would you rather take the bus?”says rather more than is strictly certainPresent perfect simple vs present perfect progressive













10















I encounter such a confusing sentence:




You are dealt two cards.




I don't understand why we should use "dealt" rather than "dealing"(Present Progressive Tense) here? What is the normal tense of "dealt" here?










share|improve this question



















  • 3





    You are dealt two cards [by someone].

    – Lambie
    yesterday















10















I encounter such a confusing sentence:




You are dealt two cards.




I don't understand why we should use "dealt" rather than "dealing"(Present Progressive Tense) here? What is the normal tense of "dealt" here?










share|improve this question



















  • 3





    You are dealt two cards [by someone].

    – Lambie
    yesterday













10












10








10


2






I encounter such a confusing sentence:




You are dealt two cards.




I don't understand why we should use "dealt" rather than "dealing"(Present Progressive Tense) here? What is the normal tense of "dealt" here?










share|improve this question
















I encounter such a confusing sentence:




You are dealt two cards.




I don't understand why we should use "dealt" rather than "dealing"(Present Progressive Tense) here? What is the normal tense of "dealt" here?







meaning tense word-difference transitivity






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited yesterday









Jasper

19.2k43771




19.2k43771










asked yesterday









Lerner ZhangLerner Zhang

84911028




84911028







  • 3





    You are dealt two cards [by someone].

    – Lambie
    yesterday












  • 3





    You are dealt two cards [by someone].

    – Lambie
    yesterday







3




3





You are dealt two cards [by someone].

– Lambie
yesterday





You are dealt two cards [by someone].

– Lambie
yesterday










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















42














In this context, you can assume that to deal = to give. So your sentence transforms into:




You are given two cards.




It means that while you are playing cards, you receive two cards (from the person holding the deck of cards).




It is also correct to say:




You are dealing / giving two cards.




but the meaning is different. In this sentence, you have the deck of cards, and you deal / give / share them with the other players.




  • are dealt => passive voice


  • are dealing => active voice



If you understand infinitive by "normal tense", then the infinitive of "dealt" is "to deal".






share|improve this answer




















  • 2





    Part of the difficulty understanding this sentence for learners, I think, is because dealt and given each take two objects, without needing any preposition, and so when they’re in the passive, you have the slightly unusual situation of a passive with a direct object. So e.g. you can say Tom gave two cards to James, with to showing that James is the indirect object, but you can also say Tom gave James two cards, where James and cards both act grammatically like direct objects. In particular, you can turn it into the passive James was given two cards [by Tom].

    – PLL
    yesterday







  • 2





    Changing the order of the words in the sentence does not change anything, grammatically or in the meaning.

    – virolino
    yesterday











  • This grammatical construction is called a retained object. Strictly speaking, it doesn't make sense, yet it is grammatically acceptable. The meaning is inferred from an implied active voice formulation such as "I dealt you two cards" where "you" is the indirect object and "two cards" is the direct object.

    – MPW
    yesterday











  • @PLL James is not a direct object even without "to" in the sentence. It's still an indirect object. The implied "to" in "Tom gave [to] James two cards" makes the meaning clearer, but need not be explicit.

    – Monty Harder
    yesterday











  • @MontyHarder: Sure, I didn’t mean to suggest that — I guess my wording was unclear. My point was that, as an indirect object without the explicit preposition, it can act syntactically like a direct one and become the subject of a passive (unlike prepositional objects), thus giving rise to a passive which also has a direct object, which is I think the thing which may surprise/mislead a learner.

    – PLL
    yesterday


















5














You have come across a passive sentence construction. Normally in an active sentence, the subject is what's called the agent. It is the one doing the action of the verb. The patient has the action applied to it. This is normally the direct object. This sentence also has an indirect object. The indirect object is often the receiver (or in this case the recipient) of the action, but doesn't experience the action. "You" are not being dealt, the "two cards" are.



In a passive sentence the agent is either missing and assumed, or included by adding by, then the agent, e.g. by the dealer.



In all the below sentences:



  • the agent is "the dealer"

  • the patient is "one card" (I've changed it from "two cards" to illustrate the grammar below)

  • the recipient is "you"

  • the verb is a form of "to deal"

  • [verb-pap] is the past participle form

  • [verb-prp] is the present participle form, the "-ing" form (looks identical to the gerund)

  • "[be]" is a conjugated form of "to be"

  • "by" and "to" represent themselves

Here is a breakdown of possible forms. They all mean much the same thing, with different emphasis. The subject, direct object, and indirect object are not always the same from sentence to sentence, but the agent, patient, and recipient all are.



  • Passive (recipient as subject): [recipient] [be] [verb-pap] [patient] ("by" [agent])


You are dealt one card.



You are dealt one card by the dealer.




  • Passive (patient as subject): [patient] [be] [verb-pap] "to" [recipient] ("by" [agent])


One card is dealt to you.



One card is dealt to you by the dealer.




  • Active (simple present): [agent] [verb] [recipient] [patient]


The dealer deals you one card.




  • Active (simple present): [agent] [verb] [patient] "to" [recipient]


The dealer deals one card to you.




  • Active (present progressive): [agent] [be] [verb-prp] [recipient] [patient]


The dealer is dealing you one card.




  • Active (present progressive): [agent] [be] [verb-prp] [patient] "to" [recipient]


The dealer is dealing one card to you.




So, when the sentence uses is dealing, it is present progressive, as you observed in your question. When the sentence uses are dealt, it is passive, and only optionally includes the agent that is causing the action.






share|improve this answer






























    0














    In English, the notion of "X [verb]s Y" can be expressed using the passive voice as "Z is [verb]ed by X". Unlike the active-voice construct where X must be specified, in the passive voice X may be (and often is) omitted, making the construct "Y is [verb]ed".



    This construct can be applied to verb phrases as well as simple verbs, as in your example. Thus "You are dealt two cards" is equivalent to "You are dealt two cards by some unspecified entity", which is in turn equivalent to "Some unspecified entity deals two cards to you".



    Note that if it were necessary to use the passive voice in the present progressive tense, the usage would be "You are being dealt cards" rather than "You are dealing cards". The past tense would be "You were dealt cards", the perfect tense "You had been dealt cards", and the imperfect tense "You were being dealt cards".






    share|improve this answer






























      0














      Being a native speaker of German, I'd answer this question thus:



      When you have a sentence in the active voice, "Abel deals two cards to you", and you turn it to the passive voice, the direct object, "cards", becomes the subject: "Two cards are dealt to you". In German (and other languages that I know, and apparently in yours as well) this is the only way to use the passive voice.



      English, hovever, can say "Abel deals you two cards", and, I feel, therefore loses the exact distinction between direct and indirect object. Therefore English can use the indirect object as the passive-voice sentence's subject, thus: "You are dealt two cards".






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      Michael is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.



















        Your Answer








        StackExchange.ready(function()
        var channelOptions =
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "481"
        ;
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
        createEditor();
        );

        else
        createEditor();

        );

        function createEditor()
        StackExchange.prepareEditor(
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
        convertImagesToLinks: false,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: null,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader:
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        ,
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        );



        );













        draft saved

        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function ()
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f202419%2fwhy-be-dealt-cards-rather-than-be-dealing-cards%23new-answer', 'question_page');

        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        4 Answers
        4






        active

        oldest

        votes








        4 Answers
        4






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes









        42














        In this context, you can assume that to deal = to give. So your sentence transforms into:




        You are given two cards.




        It means that while you are playing cards, you receive two cards (from the person holding the deck of cards).




        It is also correct to say:




        You are dealing / giving two cards.




        but the meaning is different. In this sentence, you have the deck of cards, and you deal / give / share them with the other players.




        • are dealt => passive voice


        • are dealing => active voice



        If you understand infinitive by "normal tense", then the infinitive of "dealt" is "to deal".






        share|improve this answer




















        • 2





          Part of the difficulty understanding this sentence for learners, I think, is because dealt and given each take two objects, without needing any preposition, and so when they’re in the passive, you have the slightly unusual situation of a passive with a direct object. So e.g. you can say Tom gave two cards to James, with to showing that James is the indirect object, but you can also say Tom gave James two cards, where James and cards both act grammatically like direct objects. In particular, you can turn it into the passive James was given two cards [by Tom].

          – PLL
          yesterday







        • 2





          Changing the order of the words in the sentence does not change anything, grammatically or in the meaning.

          – virolino
          yesterday











        • This grammatical construction is called a retained object. Strictly speaking, it doesn't make sense, yet it is grammatically acceptable. The meaning is inferred from an implied active voice formulation such as "I dealt you two cards" where "you" is the indirect object and "two cards" is the direct object.

          – MPW
          yesterday











        • @PLL James is not a direct object even without "to" in the sentence. It's still an indirect object. The implied "to" in "Tom gave [to] James two cards" makes the meaning clearer, but need not be explicit.

          – Monty Harder
          yesterday











        • @MontyHarder: Sure, I didn’t mean to suggest that — I guess my wording was unclear. My point was that, as an indirect object without the explicit preposition, it can act syntactically like a direct one and become the subject of a passive (unlike prepositional objects), thus giving rise to a passive which also has a direct object, which is I think the thing which may surprise/mislead a learner.

          – PLL
          yesterday















        42














        In this context, you can assume that to deal = to give. So your sentence transforms into:




        You are given two cards.




        It means that while you are playing cards, you receive two cards (from the person holding the deck of cards).




        It is also correct to say:




        You are dealing / giving two cards.




        but the meaning is different. In this sentence, you have the deck of cards, and you deal / give / share them with the other players.




        • are dealt => passive voice


        • are dealing => active voice



        If you understand infinitive by "normal tense", then the infinitive of "dealt" is "to deal".






        share|improve this answer




















        • 2





          Part of the difficulty understanding this sentence for learners, I think, is because dealt and given each take two objects, without needing any preposition, and so when they’re in the passive, you have the slightly unusual situation of a passive with a direct object. So e.g. you can say Tom gave two cards to James, with to showing that James is the indirect object, but you can also say Tom gave James two cards, where James and cards both act grammatically like direct objects. In particular, you can turn it into the passive James was given two cards [by Tom].

          – PLL
          yesterday







        • 2





          Changing the order of the words in the sentence does not change anything, grammatically or in the meaning.

          – virolino
          yesterday











        • This grammatical construction is called a retained object. Strictly speaking, it doesn't make sense, yet it is grammatically acceptable. The meaning is inferred from an implied active voice formulation such as "I dealt you two cards" where "you" is the indirect object and "two cards" is the direct object.

          – MPW
          yesterday











        • @PLL James is not a direct object even without "to" in the sentence. It's still an indirect object. The implied "to" in "Tom gave [to] James two cards" makes the meaning clearer, but need not be explicit.

          – Monty Harder
          yesterday











        • @MontyHarder: Sure, I didn’t mean to suggest that — I guess my wording was unclear. My point was that, as an indirect object without the explicit preposition, it can act syntactically like a direct one and become the subject of a passive (unlike prepositional objects), thus giving rise to a passive which also has a direct object, which is I think the thing which may surprise/mislead a learner.

          – PLL
          yesterday













        42












        42








        42







        In this context, you can assume that to deal = to give. So your sentence transforms into:




        You are given two cards.




        It means that while you are playing cards, you receive two cards (from the person holding the deck of cards).




        It is also correct to say:




        You are dealing / giving two cards.




        but the meaning is different. In this sentence, you have the deck of cards, and you deal / give / share them with the other players.




        • are dealt => passive voice


        • are dealing => active voice



        If you understand infinitive by "normal tense", then the infinitive of "dealt" is "to deal".






        share|improve this answer















        In this context, you can assume that to deal = to give. So your sentence transforms into:




        You are given two cards.




        It means that while you are playing cards, you receive two cards (from the person holding the deck of cards).




        It is also correct to say:




        You are dealing / giving two cards.




        but the meaning is different. In this sentence, you have the deck of cards, and you deal / give / share them with the other players.




        • are dealt => passive voice


        • are dealing => active voice



        If you understand infinitive by "normal tense", then the infinitive of "dealt" is "to deal".







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited 23 hours ago

























        answered yesterday









        virolinovirolino

        2,8681730




        2,8681730







        • 2





          Part of the difficulty understanding this sentence for learners, I think, is because dealt and given each take two objects, without needing any preposition, and so when they’re in the passive, you have the slightly unusual situation of a passive with a direct object. So e.g. you can say Tom gave two cards to James, with to showing that James is the indirect object, but you can also say Tom gave James two cards, where James and cards both act grammatically like direct objects. In particular, you can turn it into the passive James was given two cards [by Tom].

          – PLL
          yesterday







        • 2





          Changing the order of the words in the sentence does not change anything, grammatically or in the meaning.

          – virolino
          yesterday











        • This grammatical construction is called a retained object. Strictly speaking, it doesn't make sense, yet it is grammatically acceptable. The meaning is inferred from an implied active voice formulation such as "I dealt you two cards" where "you" is the indirect object and "two cards" is the direct object.

          – MPW
          yesterday











        • @PLL James is not a direct object even without "to" in the sentence. It's still an indirect object. The implied "to" in "Tom gave [to] James two cards" makes the meaning clearer, but need not be explicit.

          – Monty Harder
          yesterday











        • @MontyHarder: Sure, I didn’t mean to suggest that — I guess my wording was unclear. My point was that, as an indirect object without the explicit preposition, it can act syntactically like a direct one and become the subject of a passive (unlike prepositional objects), thus giving rise to a passive which also has a direct object, which is I think the thing which may surprise/mislead a learner.

          – PLL
          yesterday












        • 2





          Part of the difficulty understanding this sentence for learners, I think, is because dealt and given each take two objects, without needing any preposition, and so when they’re in the passive, you have the slightly unusual situation of a passive with a direct object. So e.g. you can say Tom gave two cards to James, with to showing that James is the indirect object, but you can also say Tom gave James two cards, where James and cards both act grammatically like direct objects. In particular, you can turn it into the passive James was given two cards [by Tom].

          – PLL
          yesterday







        • 2





          Changing the order of the words in the sentence does not change anything, grammatically or in the meaning.

          – virolino
          yesterday











        • This grammatical construction is called a retained object. Strictly speaking, it doesn't make sense, yet it is grammatically acceptable. The meaning is inferred from an implied active voice formulation such as "I dealt you two cards" where "you" is the indirect object and "two cards" is the direct object.

          – MPW
          yesterday











        • @PLL James is not a direct object even without "to" in the sentence. It's still an indirect object. The implied "to" in "Tom gave [to] James two cards" makes the meaning clearer, but need not be explicit.

          – Monty Harder
          yesterday











        • @MontyHarder: Sure, I didn’t mean to suggest that — I guess my wording was unclear. My point was that, as an indirect object without the explicit preposition, it can act syntactically like a direct one and become the subject of a passive (unlike prepositional objects), thus giving rise to a passive which also has a direct object, which is I think the thing which may surprise/mislead a learner.

          – PLL
          yesterday







        2




        2





        Part of the difficulty understanding this sentence for learners, I think, is because dealt and given each take two objects, without needing any preposition, and so when they’re in the passive, you have the slightly unusual situation of a passive with a direct object. So e.g. you can say Tom gave two cards to James, with to showing that James is the indirect object, but you can also say Tom gave James two cards, where James and cards both act grammatically like direct objects. In particular, you can turn it into the passive James was given two cards [by Tom].

        – PLL
        yesterday






        Part of the difficulty understanding this sentence for learners, I think, is because dealt and given each take two objects, without needing any preposition, and so when they’re in the passive, you have the slightly unusual situation of a passive with a direct object. So e.g. you can say Tom gave two cards to James, with to showing that James is the indirect object, but you can also say Tom gave James two cards, where James and cards both act grammatically like direct objects. In particular, you can turn it into the passive James was given two cards [by Tom].

        – PLL
        yesterday





        2




        2





        Changing the order of the words in the sentence does not change anything, grammatically or in the meaning.

        – virolino
        yesterday





        Changing the order of the words in the sentence does not change anything, grammatically or in the meaning.

        – virolino
        yesterday













        This grammatical construction is called a retained object. Strictly speaking, it doesn't make sense, yet it is grammatically acceptable. The meaning is inferred from an implied active voice formulation such as "I dealt you two cards" where "you" is the indirect object and "two cards" is the direct object.

        – MPW
        yesterday





        This grammatical construction is called a retained object. Strictly speaking, it doesn't make sense, yet it is grammatically acceptable. The meaning is inferred from an implied active voice formulation such as "I dealt you two cards" where "you" is the indirect object and "two cards" is the direct object.

        – MPW
        yesterday













        @PLL James is not a direct object even without "to" in the sentence. It's still an indirect object. The implied "to" in "Tom gave [to] James two cards" makes the meaning clearer, but need not be explicit.

        – Monty Harder
        yesterday





        @PLL James is not a direct object even without "to" in the sentence. It's still an indirect object. The implied "to" in "Tom gave [to] James two cards" makes the meaning clearer, but need not be explicit.

        – Monty Harder
        yesterday













        @MontyHarder: Sure, I didn’t mean to suggest that — I guess my wording was unclear. My point was that, as an indirect object without the explicit preposition, it can act syntactically like a direct one and become the subject of a passive (unlike prepositional objects), thus giving rise to a passive which also has a direct object, which is I think the thing which may surprise/mislead a learner.

        – PLL
        yesterday





        @MontyHarder: Sure, I didn’t mean to suggest that — I guess my wording was unclear. My point was that, as an indirect object without the explicit preposition, it can act syntactically like a direct one and become the subject of a passive (unlike prepositional objects), thus giving rise to a passive which also has a direct object, which is I think the thing which may surprise/mislead a learner.

        – PLL
        yesterday













        5














        You have come across a passive sentence construction. Normally in an active sentence, the subject is what's called the agent. It is the one doing the action of the verb. The patient has the action applied to it. This is normally the direct object. This sentence also has an indirect object. The indirect object is often the receiver (or in this case the recipient) of the action, but doesn't experience the action. "You" are not being dealt, the "two cards" are.



        In a passive sentence the agent is either missing and assumed, or included by adding by, then the agent, e.g. by the dealer.



        In all the below sentences:



        • the agent is "the dealer"

        • the patient is "one card" (I've changed it from "two cards" to illustrate the grammar below)

        • the recipient is "you"

        • the verb is a form of "to deal"

        • [verb-pap] is the past participle form

        • [verb-prp] is the present participle form, the "-ing" form (looks identical to the gerund)

        • "[be]" is a conjugated form of "to be"

        • "by" and "to" represent themselves

        Here is a breakdown of possible forms. They all mean much the same thing, with different emphasis. The subject, direct object, and indirect object are not always the same from sentence to sentence, but the agent, patient, and recipient all are.



        • Passive (recipient as subject): [recipient] [be] [verb-pap] [patient] ("by" [agent])


        You are dealt one card.



        You are dealt one card by the dealer.




        • Passive (patient as subject): [patient] [be] [verb-pap] "to" [recipient] ("by" [agent])


        One card is dealt to you.



        One card is dealt to you by the dealer.




        • Active (simple present): [agent] [verb] [recipient] [patient]


        The dealer deals you one card.




        • Active (simple present): [agent] [verb] [patient] "to" [recipient]


        The dealer deals one card to you.




        • Active (present progressive): [agent] [be] [verb-prp] [recipient] [patient]


        The dealer is dealing you one card.




        • Active (present progressive): [agent] [be] [verb-prp] [patient] "to" [recipient]


        The dealer is dealing one card to you.




        So, when the sentence uses is dealing, it is present progressive, as you observed in your question. When the sentence uses are dealt, it is passive, and only optionally includes the agent that is causing the action.






        share|improve this answer



























          5














          You have come across a passive sentence construction. Normally in an active sentence, the subject is what's called the agent. It is the one doing the action of the verb. The patient has the action applied to it. This is normally the direct object. This sentence also has an indirect object. The indirect object is often the receiver (or in this case the recipient) of the action, but doesn't experience the action. "You" are not being dealt, the "two cards" are.



          In a passive sentence the agent is either missing and assumed, or included by adding by, then the agent, e.g. by the dealer.



          In all the below sentences:



          • the agent is "the dealer"

          • the patient is "one card" (I've changed it from "two cards" to illustrate the grammar below)

          • the recipient is "you"

          • the verb is a form of "to deal"

          • [verb-pap] is the past participle form

          • [verb-prp] is the present participle form, the "-ing" form (looks identical to the gerund)

          • "[be]" is a conjugated form of "to be"

          • "by" and "to" represent themselves

          Here is a breakdown of possible forms. They all mean much the same thing, with different emphasis. The subject, direct object, and indirect object are not always the same from sentence to sentence, but the agent, patient, and recipient all are.



          • Passive (recipient as subject): [recipient] [be] [verb-pap] [patient] ("by" [agent])


          You are dealt one card.



          You are dealt one card by the dealer.




          • Passive (patient as subject): [patient] [be] [verb-pap] "to" [recipient] ("by" [agent])


          One card is dealt to you.



          One card is dealt to you by the dealer.




          • Active (simple present): [agent] [verb] [recipient] [patient]


          The dealer deals you one card.




          • Active (simple present): [agent] [verb] [patient] "to" [recipient]


          The dealer deals one card to you.




          • Active (present progressive): [agent] [be] [verb-prp] [recipient] [patient]


          The dealer is dealing you one card.




          • Active (present progressive): [agent] [be] [verb-prp] [patient] "to" [recipient]


          The dealer is dealing one card to you.




          So, when the sentence uses is dealing, it is present progressive, as you observed in your question. When the sentence uses are dealt, it is passive, and only optionally includes the agent that is causing the action.






          share|improve this answer

























            5












            5








            5







            You have come across a passive sentence construction. Normally in an active sentence, the subject is what's called the agent. It is the one doing the action of the verb. The patient has the action applied to it. This is normally the direct object. This sentence also has an indirect object. The indirect object is often the receiver (or in this case the recipient) of the action, but doesn't experience the action. "You" are not being dealt, the "two cards" are.



            In a passive sentence the agent is either missing and assumed, or included by adding by, then the agent, e.g. by the dealer.



            In all the below sentences:



            • the agent is "the dealer"

            • the patient is "one card" (I've changed it from "two cards" to illustrate the grammar below)

            • the recipient is "you"

            • the verb is a form of "to deal"

            • [verb-pap] is the past participle form

            • [verb-prp] is the present participle form, the "-ing" form (looks identical to the gerund)

            • "[be]" is a conjugated form of "to be"

            • "by" and "to" represent themselves

            Here is a breakdown of possible forms. They all mean much the same thing, with different emphasis. The subject, direct object, and indirect object are not always the same from sentence to sentence, but the agent, patient, and recipient all are.



            • Passive (recipient as subject): [recipient] [be] [verb-pap] [patient] ("by" [agent])


            You are dealt one card.



            You are dealt one card by the dealer.




            • Passive (patient as subject): [patient] [be] [verb-pap] "to" [recipient] ("by" [agent])


            One card is dealt to you.



            One card is dealt to you by the dealer.




            • Active (simple present): [agent] [verb] [recipient] [patient]


            The dealer deals you one card.




            • Active (simple present): [agent] [verb] [patient] "to" [recipient]


            The dealer deals one card to you.




            • Active (present progressive): [agent] [be] [verb-prp] [recipient] [patient]


            The dealer is dealing you one card.




            • Active (present progressive): [agent] [be] [verb-prp] [patient] "to" [recipient]


            The dealer is dealing one card to you.




            So, when the sentence uses is dealing, it is present progressive, as you observed in your question. When the sentence uses are dealt, it is passive, and only optionally includes the agent that is causing the action.






            share|improve this answer













            You have come across a passive sentence construction. Normally in an active sentence, the subject is what's called the agent. It is the one doing the action of the verb. The patient has the action applied to it. This is normally the direct object. This sentence also has an indirect object. The indirect object is often the receiver (or in this case the recipient) of the action, but doesn't experience the action. "You" are not being dealt, the "two cards" are.



            In a passive sentence the agent is either missing and assumed, or included by adding by, then the agent, e.g. by the dealer.



            In all the below sentences:



            • the agent is "the dealer"

            • the patient is "one card" (I've changed it from "two cards" to illustrate the grammar below)

            • the recipient is "you"

            • the verb is a form of "to deal"

            • [verb-pap] is the past participle form

            • [verb-prp] is the present participle form, the "-ing" form (looks identical to the gerund)

            • "[be]" is a conjugated form of "to be"

            • "by" and "to" represent themselves

            Here is a breakdown of possible forms. They all mean much the same thing, with different emphasis. The subject, direct object, and indirect object are not always the same from sentence to sentence, but the agent, patient, and recipient all are.



            • Passive (recipient as subject): [recipient] [be] [verb-pap] [patient] ("by" [agent])


            You are dealt one card.



            You are dealt one card by the dealer.




            • Passive (patient as subject): [patient] [be] [verb-pap] "to" [recipient] ("by" [agent])


            One card is dealt to you.



            One card is dealt to you by the dealer.




            • Active (simple present): [agent] [verb] [recipient] [patient]


            The dealer deals you one card.




            • Active (simple present): [agent] [verb] [patient] "to" [recipient]


            The dealer deals one card to you.




            • Active (present progressive): [agent] [be] [verb-prp] [recipient] [patient]


            The dealer is dealing you one card.




            • Active (present progressive): [agent] [be] [verb-prp] [patient] "to" [recipient]


            The dealer is dealing one card to you.




            So, when the sentence uses is dealing, it is present progressive, as you observed in your question. When the sentence uses are dealt, it is passive, and only optionally includes the agent that is causing the action.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered yesterday









            CJ DennisCJ Dennis

            2,073717




            2,073717





















                0














                In English, the notion of "X [verb]s Y" can be expressed using the passive voice as "Z is [verb]ed by X". Unlike the active-voice construct where X must be specified, in the passive voice X may be (and often is) omitted, making the construct "Y is [verb]ed".



                This construct can be applied to verb phrases as well as simple verbs, as in your example. Thus "You are dealt two cards" is equivalent to "You are dealt two cards by some unspecified entity", which is in turn equivalent to "Some unspecified entity deals two cards to you".



                Note that if it were necessary to use the passive voice in the present progressive tense, the usage would be "You are being dealt cards" rather than "You are dealing cards". The past tense would be "You were dealt cards", the perfect tense "You had been dealt cards", and the imperfect tense "You were being dealt cards".






                share|improve this answer



























                  0














                  In English, the notion of "X [verb]s Y" can be expressed using the passive voice as "Z is [verb]ed by X". Unlike the active-voice construct where X must be specified, in the passive voice X may be (and often is) omitted, making the construct "Y is [verb]ed".



                  This construct can be applied to verb phrases as well as simple verbs, as in your example. Thus "You are dealt two cards" is equivalent to "You are dealt two cards by some unspecified entity", which is in turn equivalent to "Some unspecified entity deals two cards to you".



                  Note that if it were necessary to use the passive voice in the present progressive tense, the usage would be "You are being dealt cards" rather than "You are dealing cards". The past tense would be "You were dealt cards", the perfect tense "You had been dealt cards", and the imperfect tense "You were being dealt cards".






                  share|improve this answer

























                    0












                    0








                    0







                    In English, the notion of "X [verb]s Y" can be expressed using the passive voice as "Z is [verb]ed by X". Unlike the active-voice construct where X must be specified, in the passive voice X may be (and often is) omitted, making the construct "Y is [verb]ed".



                    This construct can be applied to verb phrases as well as simple verbs, as in your example. Thus "You are dealt two cards" is equivalent to "You are dealt two cards by some unspecified entity", which is in turn equivalent to "Some unspecified entity deals two cards to you".



                    Note that if it were necessary to use the passive voice in the present progressive tense, the usage would be "You are being dealt cards" rather than "You are dealing cards". The past tense would be "You were dealt cards", the perfect tense "You had been dealt cards", and the imperfect tense "You were being dealt cards".






                    share|improve this answer













                    In English, the notion of "X [verb]s Y" can be expressed using the passive voice as "Z is [verb]ed by X". Unlike the active-voice construct where X must be specified, in the passive voice X may be (and often is) omitted, making the construct "Y is [verb]ed".



                    This construct can be applied to verb phrases as well as simple verbs, as in your example. Thus "You are dealt two cards" is equivalent to "You are dealt two cards by some unspecified entity", which is in turn equivalent to "Some unspecified entity deals two cards to you".



                    Note that if it were necessary to use the passive voice in the present progressive tense, the usage would be "You are being dealt cards" rather than "You are dealing cards". The past tense would be "You were dealt cards", the perfect tense "You had been dealt cards", and the imperfect tense "You were being dealt cards".







                    share|improve this answer












                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer










                    answered yesterday









                    supercatsupercat

                    58525




                    58525





















                        0














                        Being a native speaker of German, I'd answer this question thus:



                        When you have a sentence in the active voice, "Abel deals two cards to you", and you turn it to the passive voice, the direct object, "cards", becomes the subject: "Two cards are dealt to you". In German (and other languages that I know, and apparently in yours as well) this is the only way to use the passive voice.



                        English, hovever, can say "Abel deals you two cards", and, I feel, therefore loses the exact distinction between direct and indirect object. Therefore English can use the indirect object as the passive-voice sentence's subject, thus: "You are dealt two cards".






                        share|improve this answer








                        New contributor




                        Michael is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.
























                          0














                          Being a native speaker of German, I'd answer this question thus:



                          When you have a sentence in the active voice, "Abel deals two cards to you", and you turn it to the passive voice, the direct object, "cards", becomes the subject: "Two cards are dealt to you". In German (and other languages that I know, and apparently in yours as well) this is the only way to use the passive voice.



                          English, hovever, can say "Abel deals you two cards", and, I feel, therefore loses the exact distinction between direct and indirect object. Therefore English can use the indirect object as the passive-voice sentence's subject, thus: "You are dealt two cards".






                          share|improve this answer








                          New contributor




                          Michael is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.






















                            0












                            0








                            0







                            Being a native speaker of German, I'd answer this question thus:



                            When you have a sentence in the active voice, "Abel deals two cards to you", and you turn it to the passive voice, the direct object, "cards", becomes the subject: "Two cards are dealt to you". In German (and other languages that I know, and apparently in yours as well) this is the only way to use the passive voice.



                            English, hovever, can say "Abel deals you two cards", and, I feel, therefore loses the exact distinction between direct and indirect object. Therefore English can use the indirect object as the passive-voice sentence's subject, thus: "You are dealt two cards".






                            share|improve this answer








                            New contributor




                            Michael is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                            Check out our Code of Conduct.










                            Being a native speaker of German, I'd answer this question thus:



                            When you have a sentence in the active voice, "Abel deals two cards to you", and you turn it to the passive voice, the direct object, "cards", becomes the subject: "Two cards are dealt to you". In German (and other languages that I know, and apparently in yours as well) this is the only way to use the passive voice.



                            English, hovever, can say "Abel deals you two cards", and, I feel, therefore loses the exact distinction between direct and indirect object. Therefore English can use the indirect object as the passive-voice sentence's subject, thus: "You are dealt two cards".







                            share|improve this answer








                            New contributor




                            Michael is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                            Check out our Code of Conduct.









                            share|improve this answer



                            share|improve this answer






                            New contributor




                            Michael is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                            Check out our Code of Conduct.









                            answered yesterday









                            MichaelMichael

                            1




                            1




                            New contributor




                            Michael is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                            Check out our Code of Conduct.





                            New contributor





                            Michael is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                            Check out our Code of Conduct.






                            Michael is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                            Check out our Code of Conduct.



























                                draft saved

                                draft discarded
















































                                Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language Learners Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid


                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function ()
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f202419%2fwhy-be-dealt-cards-rather-than-be-dealing-cards%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown







                                Popular posts from this blog

                                Sum ergo cogito? 1 nng

                                三茅街道4182Guuntc Dn precexpngmageondP