Consider the following passage adapted from the article "Instant Nonsense" by Lynne Truss from the November 19-21, 2004 USA Weekend. I have split up the passage so that each finite clause appears on a separate numbered line. For each clause (1-21) circle the finite verb. Then on the line before the sentence, indicate if it is an active (A) or passive (P) clause. Some examples have been done for you. [ 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. A The good news about young people and their obsession with instant messaging: it may not entirely destroy the English language. The bad news: it's setting teenagers and children back when it comes to their command of language and the written word. How long before Shakespeare editors are forced to translate Hamlet's most famous speech for the benefit of younger readers: "2B or N2B: that is the FAQ"? Frankly, I'm alarmed by the impact of instant messaging. Already, more than 13 million U.S. teens use it, according to research from Pew Internet & American Life Project, and teachers now find themselves grading essays by students who insist on the validity of "U" and "4" as substitutes for words You may object that this code-speak is the innocent work of young people who will grow out of it. But look at your own correspondence. Isn't "BTW" now accepted for "by the way," and "COB" for "close of business"? With onslaught comes acceptance. English embraces change; its academic exponents pride themselves on never saying a word against it. Instant messaging, therefore, has been greeted by the guardians of language as a brilliant marriage of speech, symbol and written word. What worries me, however: If young people cling to their own version of written English, will they ultimately not recognize real words?