@article{2016,title={A General Outlook for Active and Passive Voice in Turkish and German},abstractNode={The topic “voice of the verb” is a significant matter both for Turkish and German. When the “voice” concept is thought within the context of Turkish; frequently-used linguistic phenomena as passivity, causativisation, reciprocality, reflexive voice or the such – are evoked. However, when the matter is seen in terms of the theming in the linguistic sources, it is seen that passivity in German takes a prioritised concern. Maybe, this state stems from the fact that these linguistic phenomena function differently in both languages. Likewise, generally, these categories emerge morphologically in Turkish and lexically in German. The active and passive voice concepts that we have dwelt on in this work are assessed differently in Turkish and German study fields. While, for Turkish grammar studies, active voice is concentrated on; for German, passive voice is more heavily studied. Moreover, while “passive voice” in Turkish is merely seen as a morphological phenomenon; in German - the semantic, pragmatic, and morphological aspects of “passive voice” are highlighted. As a matter of fact, there exist such text forms that “passivity” is preferred since the agent of the action is not known or the agent is not important. For example; the preferred narration style is the “passive voice” in such fields as press, science, and description. Also, in Turkish, a mistake that is done in this regard is trying to establish a symmetric link between transivity and passivity. Yet, neither can each transitive verb form a voice; nor there exists an obligation for “a transitive active voice”, for the formation of “a passive voice”. The pre-condition of the formation of “a passive voice” sentence is whether the verb allows an agent/doer/maker subject or its expression of a process.},author={Tahir BALCI-- Ülger PANZER - Halime BALCI - Erdal KAÇAR},year={2016},journal={Journal of Turkish Studies}}