The plan was proved a failure.

[notletrest]

In logic " The plan was proved a failure." is good. Is it right and why?
Please help me . Thank you very much!

 

[bhaisahab]

In logic " The plan was proved a failure." is good. Is it right and why?
Please help me . Thank you very much!

It's fine.

 

[notletrest]

Qian Ge-chuan, a famous Chinese scholar of English, holds in his Chinese book << A Sequence to English Difficulties Explanations >>(p.83) in 1981 that "The plan was proved a failure." is wrong. The word "was" should be omitted. Because here to prove means to turn, and is an intransitive verb. In the same way ,in the following two sentences "Great advantages are accrued from this measure." and "What will be ensued on this?" ,the words "are " and "be" should be omitted,too.
Thanks!

 

[Barb_D]

Remember that the space goes after the comma, not before.

The famous scholar seems to have ignored the passive aspect of "was proven/was proved."

The original sentence is fine. So is the intransitive version.

On the other hand "What will ensue on this?" is a very unnatural sentence, though better than the non-grammatical "are ensued" version.

 

[kite]

Can't we say "The plan was proved as a failure"?

 

[Rover_KE]

No, but you can say 'The plan was proved to be a failure'.

 

[Tdol]

Qian Ge-chuan, a famous Chinese scholar of English, holds in his Chinese book << A Sequence to English Difficulties Explanations >>(p.83) in 1981 that "The plan was proved a failure." is wrong. The word "was" should be omitted. Because here to prove means to turn, and is an intransitive verb. In the same way ,in the following two sentences "Great advantages are accrued from this measure." and "What will be ensued on this?" ,the words "are " and "be" should be omitted,too.
Thanks!

It depends on the context, but prove can be used in the passive. Without any more context, I would go for the active, but this is one of the problems of looking at decontextualised language.