Accusative in Passive Clauses

In an Esperanto passive, the active direct object becomes the grammatical subject. It therefore loses accusative -n: active La komitato aprobis la proponon becomes passive La propono estis aprobita. The change is structural, not merely a change of verb form.

This rule prevents a common English-speaker error. English word order makes “the proposal” look like the same noun phrase before and after passivization; Esperanto visibly reassigns its role. Other -n phrases may still occur in a passive clause, but they must have another source—an embedded verb, direction, duration, or extent.

From object to subject

The core transformation has three parts:

In the active sentence, la longan artikolon is the object, so adjective and noun take -n. In the passive, la longa artikolo is the subject and both lose it. The participle korektita agrees in number with that subject:

Pronouns and correlatives change role too

An object pronoun promoted to subject returns to its base form:

The passive cannot retain nin as its subject. The same logic applies to correlatives:

Kiu is the passive subject, so it has no -n. Compare the active question Kiun la komitato elektis? “Whom did the committee choose?”, where kiun is an object.

The active counterpart is Oni ŝanĝis nenion. Object nenion becomes subject nenio. Correlatives in -u and -o show the same role alternation as nouns and personal pronouns.

The agent takes de, not the accusative

If the doer matters, neutral Esperanto introduces it with de or, where ambiguity threatens, fare de. An ordinary preposition governs the base form:

Neither inĝeniero nor la banko takes -n. They are prepositional agents, not direct objects. Fare de is (formal) and useful when plain de might be mistaken for possession, origin, or another relation; ordinary de is the usual neutral form.

Esperanto does not copy the English recipient passive

English can promote the recipient in “I was given a book.” With ordinary doni, Esperanto treats the thing transferred as the direct object and the recipient as an al-complement. The natural passive therefore promotes the thing:

The English-shaped Mi estis donita libron does not follow the standard frame: mi was not the direct object of active doni. If a verb independently allows a person as its direct object, that person can of course become passive subject. For example, active La firmao pagis la laboristojn yields:

This is a matter of the active verb’s valency, not a general permission to promote any nearby participant. See agents with de for agent marking and two objects and valency for recipient frames.

Why an accusative can still appear in a passive clause

The promoted object itself loses -n, but another verb inside the passive sentence may license its own object:

La administranto is the passive subject of estis devigita. La novan kontrakton remains the object of the infinitive subskribi. There is no contradiction: the two phrases belong to different predicates.

Directional -n also remains possible:

The preposition en plus -n marks motion into the hall. La grandan salonon is not the object of kondukitaj. If the guests were already inside, the static form would be en la granda salono.

A measure phrase may likewise take -n:

Tri monatojn is duration, not an object. These examples show why “passives never contain -n” is false. The accurate rule is narrower: the participant promoted from active object to passive subject does not keep object -n.

Subjectless passives

When an active construction has no expressed object to promote, Esperanto can use an impersonal passive with an adverbial participle in -e. This occurs especially when the active subject would be generic oni:

There is no noun subject, so the participle is parolate, not parolita. The topic remains the pri-phrase and does not become an accusative object. In everyday conversation, active Oni longe parolis pri la propono is often simpler.

The infinitive phrase supplies the content of the decision. It does not receive -n, though its internal object la voĉdonon is marked normally.

Predicative complements and passive participles

The passive participle after esti describes the subject and therefore agrees in number but not case: la pordo estas fermita, la pordoj estas fermitaj. A separate result or role complement also normally stays unmarked:

Nepraktika describes la propono through the verb; it is not an adjective inside an accusative noun phrase. Compare active La komitato konsideris la proponon nepraktika, where only la proponon is the object.

Norm, usage, and register

The Fundamento explicitly models active-to-passive conversion with the former object becoming an unmarked subject. PMEG states the same rule and distinguishes personal passives with adjectival participles from subjectless passives with adverbial participles. This is foundational norm.

Passives are fully standard in every register, though conversational Esperanto often prefers an active sentence with oni or a verb in -iĝ-. Dense passive chains are more characteristic of (formal), (academic), and administrative writing. That stylistic choice never changes the case rule.

Common Mistakes

1. Keeping -n on the promoted subject.

2. Failing to change an object pronoun into a subject pronoun.

3. Adding -n after the agent preposition.

4. Copying the English recipient passive.

5. Removing a legitimate object from an embedded infinitive.

Key Takeaways

• The active object becomes an unmarked passive subject and loses -n.
• An expressed passive agent is a de- or fare de-complement, not an object.
• Esperanto normally promotes only the active direct object, not an English-style indirect recipient.
• Accusatives may remain inside passive clauses as objects of embedded verbs or as directional and measure phrases.
• Personal passives use an adjectival participle; subjectless passives use an adverbial participle in -e.