If there is a three-member passive construction, then there will be a two-member passive construction, derived from the three-member construction by simple omission of the indirect object.
Standardized
IF there is a three-member passive construction, THEN there will be a two-member passive construction, derived from the three-member construction by simple omission of the agent in an oblique object relation.
1. Kurylowicz 1946: 388: “In no language passive is used in three-member constructions only”.2. The history of European languages reveals that three-member passive constructions arise later than two-member ones. Probably there is a genetic derivational hierarchy: primary active construction => two-member passive construction => three-member passive construction. This means that two-member passive constrictions should not be considered as reduced variants of three-member constructions (Xrakovskij 1974: 28). 3. Cf. #435 for a similar statement by Eckman, who calls three-member passives “full” and two-member passives “reduced”.
1. Kurylowicz 1946: 388: “In no language passive is used in three-member constructions only”.2. The history of European languages reveals that three-member passive constructions arise later than two-member ones. Probably there is a genetic derivational hierarchy: primary active construction => two-member passive construction => three-member passive construction. This means that two-member passive constrictions should not be considered as reduced variants of three-member constructions (Xrakovskij 1974: 28). 3. Cf. #435 for a similar statement by Eckman, who calls three-member passives “full” and two-member passives “reduced”.