Some English verbs can be used in the same form in both active and passive meaning. E.g.:
- (active) I change the world - (passive) the world changes (i.e is being changed).
- (active) I open the door - (passive) the door opens (i.e is being opened by me).
- (active) I break a bone - (passive) a bone breaks.
Not to be confused with passive voice though. It's not actually passive ('the door closes' is not same as 'the door is closed') but you definitely can feel the difference of meaning - 'I close the door' and 'the door closes' - it's like the opposite directions of actor and subject: in first form subject is actor, in the second the subject is the object being acting on.
In Russian, we have a special category for this - the reflexiveness. A reflexive verb is formed by adding a -ся postfix which literally means 'itself'. That is, if one closes (закрывает) the door, then the door closes (закрывается) - that is literally 'closes itself' which is nonsense but it means that the door doesn't close anything, but it is being closed itself.
I remember there is a general rule in English how to determine if a verb can be used in such way or not. It has something to do with transitiveness (intransitive cannot). But apparently, this rule has many exceptions, it's more kinda guess than a strict rule. I found it somewhere in the Internet long time ago but cannot find it now anymore.
Could you please explain more about this topic? How such verbs are called in English linguistics? What is the rule? What does transitiveness have to do with all this? etc