In an Esperanto passive, de introduces the agent: the participant that would be the subject of the corresponding active clause. La romano estis verkita de ŝi reverses Ŝi verkis la romanon; the de phrase preserves the doer without making it the grammatical subject. The full clause pattern is introduced under the esti-passive.
Recovering the Active Clause
The most reliable way to recognize an agent is to reconstruct the active clause.
La propono estis aprobita de la komitato.
The proposal was approved by the committee.
The passive subject la propono becomes the active object; la komitato loses de and becomes the active subject:
La komitato aprobis la proponon.
The committee approved the proposal.
This relation distinguishes an agent from other de phrases. The agent performs, experiences, or causes the participle's action. In the foundational passive pattern, it is optional: La propono estis aprobita is complete without it.
Ĉu la mesaĝo estis sendita de Nora aŭ de Karim?
Was the message sent by Nora or by Karim?
La fakturo ne estis pagita de la kliento.
The invoice was not paid by the client.
Question and negation do not change the agent marking. The passive participle agrees with its grammatical subject—mesaĝo, fakturo—not with the noun after de.
DE Works with All Passive Participles
The agent marker is independent of the passive participle's phase. -At- shows an unfolding or repeated action, -it- completion or result, and -ot- a prospective action.
| Phase | Passive phrase | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| ongoing/repeated | kontrolata de la teknikisto | being checked by the technician |
| completed/result | kontrolita de la teknikisto | checked by the technician |
| prospective | kontrolota de la teknikisto | to be checked by the technician |
La maŝino estas nun kontrolata de la teknikisto.
The machine is now being checked by the technician.
La maŝino estas jam kontrolita de la teknikisto.
The machine has already been checked by the technician.
Morgaŭ matene la maŝino ankoraŭ estos kontrolota de la teknikisto.
Tomorrow morning the machine will still be awaiting its check by the technician.
The finite form of esti supplies the reference time, while -at-/-it-/-ot- supplies the event phase. De merely names the semantic subject and does not choose either layer of time; the difficult first two phases are compared in choosing -at- versus -it-.
Agent phrases also occur with passive participles outside a finite esti-passive:
Ni diskutis la raporton verkitan de sendependa fakulo.
We discussed the report written by an independent expert.
Intervjuate de tri ĵurnalistoj samtempe, ŝi restis trankvila.
While being interviewed by three journalists at once, she remained calm.
Li estas malnova konato de mia familio.
He is a longtime acquaintance of my family.
These illustrate adjectival verkitan, adverbial intervjuate, and nominal konato. In each case, the de phrase identifies the semantic subject of the passive participial idea. By contrast, an active participle already describes its doer: in la fakulo verkinta la raporton, la fakulo itself is the semantic subject, so no agent phrase is required.
Agent, Instrument, and Cause
English “by” covers both agents and means. Esperanto normally separates them:
- de marks the agent or effective causer;
- per marks an instrument, method, or means.
La kuko estis tranĉita de Sara per akra tranĉilo.
The cake was cut by Sara with a sharp knife.
Sara is the agent; the knife is the instrument. Reversing the prepositions would reverse or obscure these roles.
Natural forces and substances may function as effective causers with de, even without intention:
La montpasejo estis kovrita de profunda neĝo.
The mountain pass was covered by deep snow.
La malnova arbo estis frapita de fulmo.
The old tree was struck by lightning.
These patterns are well established in standard usage. If you instead mean the reason for a reaction or condition, pro may be appropriate: Li estis laca pro la varmego “He was tired because of the heat.” That is not an agentive passive relation.
When DE Is Ambiguous
De also marks source, separation, possession, and many other relations. Beside a passive participle, the agent reading is normally strong—but not always unambiguous.
La infano estis forprenita de la patrino.
The child was taken away by the mother; potentially also: taken away from the mother.
For an unambiguous agent, use fare de:
La infano estis forprenita fare de la patrino.
The child was taken away by the mother.
For separation from the mother, use disde, for de, or another explicit source expression:
La infano estis forprenita disde la patrino.
The child was taken away from the mother.
Fare de is accepted standard Esperanto, especially useful where simple de would genuinely mislead. It is not the neutral default for every passive. In clear sentences, repeating fare de makes prose bureaucratic and heavy.
— Ĉu la foto estis deprenita de la muro aŭ farita de la muzeo? — Ĝi estis deprenita de la muro fare de la kuratoro.
— Was the picture taken down from the wall or produced by the museum? — It was taken down from the wall by the curator.
The exchange shows why role-marking matters: de la muro is source, while fare de la kuratoro is unambiguously agent.
The standalone preposition far, used by some speakers for agents, is unofficial. Learners should recognize it in attested texts but use standard de or, when needed, fare de.
Experiencers with AL
With passive expressions of knowing and perception, the semantic participant may be an experiencer rather than an intentional agent. Standard usage often allows or favors al:
La problemo estas konata al ĉiuj en la teamo.
The problem is known to everyone on the team.
Konata de ĉiuj is also possible and presents “everyone” more directly as those who know. Konata al ĉiuj presents the problem as lying within everyone's knowledge. This is accepted variation grounded in the lexical meaning, not a general license to replace passive-agent de with al.
Information Structure and Register
An explicit agent is useful when the passive subject must remain the topic but responsibility still matters. This is common in (formal) reports, legal prose, technical documentation, and journalism:
La rezultoj estis konfirmitaj de du sendependaj laboratorioj.
The results were confirmed by two independent laboratories.
In (informal) conversation, the active version Du sendependaj laboratorioj konfirmis la rezultojn is often more direct. Neither is more “correct”; they package information differently. Avoid using passive syntax merely because English uses it.
Common Mistakes
Copying English “by” for an instrument
❌ La pano estis tranĉita de tranĉilo.
Incorrect for the intended instrument reading — this presents the knife as an agent.
✅ La pano estis tranĉita per tranĉilo.
The bread was cut with a knife.
Marking the agent with PER
❌ La pano estis tranĉita per Leila.
Incorrect — a person acting intentionally is the agent, not the instrument.
✅ La pano estis tranĉita de Leila.
The bread was cut by Leila.
Using FARE DE everywhere
❌ La letero estis skribita fare de mi fare de krajono.
Incorrect — the second phrase is an instrument, and the whole sentence is needlessly distorted.
✅ La letero estis skribita de mi per krajono.
The letter was written by me in pencil.
Leaving a source-agent ambiguity unresolved
❌ La biciklo estis forprenita de la posedanto.
Ambiguous — did the owner take it, or was it taken from the owner?
✅ La biciklo estis forprenita de la polico disde la posedanto.
The bicycle was taken from the owner by the police.
Making the participle agree with the agent
❌ La libro estas verkitaj de du aŭtoroj.
Incorrect — the participle agrees with singular <em>la libro</em>, not the plural agent.
✅ La libro estas verkita de du aŭtoroj.
The book is written by two authors.
Key Takeaways
- De marks the semantic doer of a passive participle and corresponds to the subject of the active clause.
- The passive participle agrees with the passive subject, never with the de phrase.
- Use per for an instrument and a more explicit source expression when simple de would be ambiguous.
- Fare de is standard but normally unnecessary; unofficial far is not recommended for neutral production.
- With expressions such as konata, al may mark an experiencer, but it is not a general passive-agent marker.
Now practice Esperanto
Reading grammar gets you part of the way. The exercises are where it sticks — free, no signup needed.
Start learning Esperanto →Related Topics
- The Esti-PassiveB1 — Form the standard Esperanto passive with esti plus an agreeing passive participle, while keeping tense and event phase separate.
- Agentless PassivesC1 — Use passive clauses without naming the doer, and distinguish ordinary subject-bearing passives from impersonal passives in -e.
- Passive Present Participle -AT-B2 — Use -at- for an affected participant while an action is in progress or regularly repeated.
- Passive Past Participle -IT-C1 — Use -it- for an affected participant once an action is complete or its resulting state is relevant.
- DeA2 — Use de for movement or development away from a source and for relationships such as possession, authorship, composition, time, and passive agency.
- PerB1 — Use per for an instrument, means, method, channel, or intermediary through which an action is carried out.