2.6.1 The Processes and Participants
In this system, meaning is established toward the process involved in a clause. The focal point is that a clause consists of process or a flow of events Halliday,
2004. The continuous flow of event with its variation experienced and intended by the writers is captured and transferred into a clause. Simultaneously, the process
affects the choice of grammar and vocabulary in a clause by determining the way it encodes an experience of the real world into the realm of language system
Thompson, 2004. Basically, there are two distinguished classes of process types, the process of
the external world outer experience and the process of consciousness inner experience. Halliday 2004 describes the grammatical categories for these
experiences as material process clauses and mental process clauses. However, in
order to construct a coherent theory of experience, there is an additional component
in the system which is relational process clauses that signify relation of one fragment
of experience toward another for the purpose of identifying and classifying. Aside those three main components, there is a component which shares the characteristics
of both material and mental process clauses indicated as behavioural processes that
represent the outer demonstration of inner workings, consciousness and psychological states processes. The fifth category of process which identifies the
symbolic relationships in the human consciousness resulted in the form of language
—having the characteristics of mental and relational categories—is
construed as verbal processes. Finally, existential process is included in the process
type which is situated between the relational and material processes as the process
related to existence. The components of each process type are summarized in Table 2.1 below.
Table 2.1 The characteristics of process types Halliday, 2004
: 260
Process type Category
meaning Participants,
directly involved Participants,
obliquely involved material:
action event
doing doing
happening Actor, Goal
Recipient, Client; Scope; Initiator;
Attribute
behavioural behaving
Behaver Behaviour
mental: perception
cognition desideration
emotion sensing
‗seeing thinking
‗wanting’ ‗feeling’
Senser, Phenomenon
verbal saying
Sayer, Target Receiver, Verbiage
relational: attribution
identification ‗being’
attributing identifying
Carrier, Attribute Token, Value
Attributor, Beneficiary, Assigner
existential existing
Existent 2.6.1.1 Material clauses: processes of doing-and-happening
The first primary system in the process type that defines the outer experience is the material clauses. It accounts for a quantum of change in processes of happening
through the expense of energy Halliday, 2004. The focus in this process is the concrete changes happening in the participants resulted from the action.
Consequently, these processes involve concrete and tangible actions Eggins, 2004. The actions are done by an entity which may be directed toward other entities.
The active participant that contributes the energy in the action is recognized as the
Actor. Thus, it indicates that this participant is an inherent participant that takes the
action of changing which leads to a different outcome of the initial phase of the action in this process Halliday, 2004. Meanwhile, the participant to whom the
action can be extended is the Goal Halliday, 2004. Therefore, the Goal does not
always appear in this process type which makes it an oblique participant. Related to the two participants, there are two types of clauses which address
the issue of the one in which the outcome is registered to. The process which indicates the confinement of the outcome of the process to the Actor is intransitive
clause which represents a ―happening‖ process Halliday, 2004. It stresses that ‗an entity does something’, thus, it does not require the existence of the Goal. It is usually
proven by asking
what did x do?
probe. The type of process which includes the Goal participant is called transitive clause which represents a ―doing‖ which can be probed
by a question, ―what did x do to y?‖ Halliday, 2004. Hence, the outcome is registered on the Goal. For instance, ―the lion sprang Halliday, 2004‖ indicates a
happening or intransitive clause in which it implies that the Actor or
the lion
did the action of
sprang
. The outcome of the action is confined to the Actor itself which is
the inherent participant. On the othe r hand, in ―the lion caught the tourist‖ Halliday,
2004, the Actor did something to the other participant which is the Goal or
the tourist
. Hence, the Goal undergoes the outcome of the process which indicates a doing or transitive clause.
Regarding the final phase of the unfolding process in one of the participants in the clause, there are additional subtypes which are deemed important to be discussed.
Halliday 2004 presents two subtypes to distinguish the nature of the outcome. The first one is creative clause which implies that the Actor or the Goal comes into
existence as the result of the process conducted. Ergo, the outcome of the process is the participant itself. For example, ―I’ve just made
the Christmas pudding
Thompson, 2004.‖ The Goal or
the Christmas pudding
is brought into existence through the process conducted by the Actor. The second subtype is transformative
clause which brings the notion of different final phase condition of the initial one of the participant. Instead of coming into existence, the participant undergoes changing
which is the effect of the process. It should be noted that the participant has already existed before the action is conducted. However, Halliday 2004 argues that it can
also suggest maintaining the condition of initial phase of the participant because it still has a connection with the condition of the existing participant. For example, ―My
mum never eats
Christmas pudding
Thompson, 2004.‖ The sentence implies that
my mum
or
Christmas pudding
has already existed before the action. Consequently, it indicates that the outcome of the process is to maintain the condition of the
participant of never consuming the dessert. Aside of the inherent participants, there are also oblique participants that
contribute significant meaning in the clause. The roles included in the system are
Beneficiary and Scope. The Beneficiary participant includes the one which gains
benefits from the process. In traditional grammar, it is recognized as the indirect object which can be realized with or without preposition depends on its position
whether it precedes or follows the Goal Thompson, 2004. The Scope, as the term indicated, is an independent entity in the process which signifies the domain of the
existed process. It is highly restricted to intransitive clause in which it follows the verb. Consequently, it can cause confusion whether it should be interpreted as a
Scope or a Goal. Hence, in order to highlight the differences, Halliday 2004 emphasizes several indicators of Scope: i related to its independent notion, the
Scope does not receive any effect performed by the process, ii the Scope can act as the actual process in the clause, iii it cannot be probed by
do to
or
do with
question, iv it cannot be followed by a resultative Attribute a resultant qualitative state of the
Actor or the Goal of a completed process, v it is regulated to the participant of non- personal pronoun, and vi possessive modification cannot be implemented in this
element.
2.6.1.2 Mental clauses: processes of sensing
In contrast with the previous clause, the Mental processes possess a focal point toward the inner experience as the term itself refer to. Its major concern is the
quantum of change in the experience or process in the realm of consciousness Halliday, 2004. The focus is on the working of the inner self of a conscious being
on the surrounding event, belief, entity, and so on. Hence, the effect is mainly directed at the participant who conducts the process himself rather than other
participant mentioned in the clause or something triggers the working of consciousness of someone which marks the contrast with the material process.
In this process, there are usually two inherent participants involved. The first
participant is the Senser which is always recognized as human-like entity that bears
the consciousness characteristic Halliday, 2004. It is a highly isolated role which is occupied by an entity that is acknowledged to possess abilities of feeling, thinking,
wanting or perceiving. This role is followed by the Phenomenon as the element that
the process of consciousness is being reflected Halliday, 2004. It denotes the participant which is being projected to be felt, thought, wanted or perceived. These
participants can be identified from this sentence ―
She
could hear
his voice
Thompson, 2004.‖ The participant
she
is considered as the Senser who is able to perceive the process of hearing whereas
his voice
– the things which are perceived as being heard by the Senser
– is put under the Phenomenon category. Regarding the Phenomenon characteristics, its similarity with the Goal in the
material processes is quite high. However, Halliday 2004 argues that the Phenomenon, in fact, has a far greater range of elements than the Goal. Instead of
regarding the participant as a tangible thing, the mental workings can project it further into abstract entity, such as action and cognition. Hence, he has proposed two
types of embedded Phenomena: Acts and Facts. The Act is usually projected into the mental processes of perception and realized by a non-finite clause which is
considered as a noun phrase. For instance, ―I saw
the operation taking pla ce
Eggins, 2004.‖ The second type of embedded Phenomenon, the Fact Phenomenon, is often
found in the form of a finite embedded clause introduced by
that
explicitly or implicitly and treated as a noun phrase. For example, ―She didn’t realize
that it was a bomb
Eggins, 2004.‖ Furthermore, it can be examined by adding the word
fact
before
that
. For instance, ―She didn’t realize
the fact that it was a bomb
Eggins 2004.‖
The processes of sensing endowed with by the conscious beings can be manifested into different preferences of mental actions. Therefore, Halliday 2004
projects those variants into four subcategories: perceptive, cognitive, desiderative, and emotive. The processes included in the perceptive subcategory are the mental
actions of feeling, such as
sad
and
happy
. The processes of thinking, such as
decide, know,
and
understand
, are categorized into cognitive subcategory. The processes
related to senses, for example
see
and
hear
, are put under the perception subcategory. Meanwhile, the final mental workings which describe the processes of desiring
something are classified into desideration subcategory, e.g.,
want
and
need
.
2.6.1.3 Relational clauses: processes of being and having
This type of process is considered as the third category of the main processes accompanies the previous process types, the Material and Mental processes. It
features the characterization and identification processes of an existence resulting from the relation of one aspect with the others Halliday, 2004; Eggins, 2004. This
tenet suggests that in a relational clause two inherent participants construe an abstract relationship that share the same domain or being. This abstract relationship is
configured into two distinct mode of being, namely the processes of characterization and identification, which are labelled as attributive and identifying clauses, along
with three main types of relational processes: intensive, possessive, and circumstantial.
Table 2.2
The principal categories of ‗relational’ clause Halliday,
2004:
216
i Attributive
‘a is an attribute of x’ ii
Identifying ‘a is the identity of x’
1 intensive ‗
x
is
a
’ Sarah is wise
Sarah is the leader; the leader is Sarah
2 possessive ‗
x
has
a
’ Peter has a piano
the piano is Peter’s; Peter’s is the piano
3 circumstantial ‗
x
is at
a
’ the fair is on a Tuesday tomorrow is the 10
th
; the 10
th
is tomorrow
In the attributive mode which is categorized into the intensive relation, an
entity, which is known as the Carrier, is ascribed to some quality labelled as the Attribute. This type of relational clause is used to characterize an entity Carrier by
assigning an evaluative characteristic Attribute which in turn classifying it into a
class Halliday, 2004. From table 2.2,
Sarah
as the participant who has the characteristic of wisdom is the Carrier whereas the Attribute is the assigned
characteristic,
wise
. This type of clause typically uses a Predicator
be
to signify the relationship between the Carrier and the Attribute Thompson, 2004. However, other verbs, such
as
seem,
are commonly found in this type as long as they keep the essence of assigning an evaluative Attribute to the Carrier. It should be noted that this mode of
being is usually irreversible and the article assigned to the nominal group is typically indefinite. Furthermore, it can be probed by
what?
,
how?
or
what... like?
questions Halliday, 2004; Thompson, 2004.
Halliday 2004 divides the intensive attribution further based on the membership specification, whether it is entity or quality. When the Attribute refers to
the entity that constitutes the class by realizing the nominal group with Thing as Head, it is the entity Attribute, for example
He was an architect
Halliday, 2004. On the other hand, when the class of the Attribute is constituted by referring to a quality
or qualities, as in
Sarah is wise
, it is identified as the quality attribution. An Epithet is used as the Head instead of the Thing in the nominal groups in which the Thing in
nominal group can be considered as general and inferred from the context. The Epithet is realized by an adjective or participial verbal form, which is frequently
accompanied by adverbs of degree. On the contrary, a clause can have an entity which is equivalent with another
entity. This clause will be classified into the identifying mode in which the
participants are assigned as Token and Value and the focal point is on assigning a
certain identity to an entity, ―
x
is identified by
a
‖, Halliday, 2004. The function of this type of clause is to establish certain uniqueness, define technical names, and
assess evidence Halliday, 2004. In determining the Token and Value in an intensive clause, the crucial factor
is in distinguishing whether it is a specific realization or the general one Thompson, 2004. From Table 2.2,
Sarah
in ―Sarah is the leader‖ can be considered as the specific entity realizes or embodies the general category of
the leader
. Hence,
Sarah
is labeled as the Token whereas
the leader
fills the role of Value. In order to
strengthen the assessment, the clause can be paraphrased into ―Sarah fills the role ofrepresents the leader.‖ Halliday 2004 elaborates it further by stating that the
Token is the member whereas the Value is the exclusive status or role assigned to it. This mode of being is reversible in which the Predicator or lexical verb acts as
an equivalent sign of the two participants. In addition, the nominal group in this type of clause is usually realized by a definite article as well as a proper noun or pronoun
which can be probed by ―WhatWhoWhich is
x
the Identified?‖ Thompson, 2004. Aside of CarrierAttribute and TokenValue participants, there may be an
additional ―third‖ participant in the equation. This third role represents the entity that assigns the relationship of these two modes Halliday, 2004. In the case of
identifying, it is labelled as the Assigner; in the case of attributing, it is labelled as
the Attributor. Other types of relational clause are the possessive and circumstantial clauses.
The possessive type deals with the matter of ownership Halliday, 2004. Hence, it marks a possession of an entity toward another entity. The circumstantial type
– as
the name indicates – relates an entity with circumstance elements, such as time,
place, manner, cause, accompaniment, role, matter or angle Halliday, 2004. The salient feature is the utilization of background information to point out the relational
aspects in the clause. The possessive clause of the attributive mode can be expressed in two ways,
the role of the Attribute and the process. In the first type, the Carrier is the thing owned by the possessor or the Attribute, e.g.: ―
This
[Carrier] is
yours
[Attribute] Eggins,
2004.‖ In the latter type, the possessing is encoded through the process, the possessor is the Carrier, and likewise the Attribute is the possessor. Halliday 2004
suggests assessing the ascribing of the Attribute to mark out the differences using this example, ―
Peter
[Carrier] has
a piano
[Attribute].‖ The Carrier is labelled to
Peter
because it conveys the meaning that the piano-ownership is the ascribing Attribute. It differs with: ―
The piano
[Carrier] belongs to
Peter
[Attribute].‖ Here, the Carrier serves as the possessed one which underlines the attribution of
Peter
. The possession type for the identifying mode is almost similar to the previous
case. However, rather than being ascribed to an entity, the ownership is in the form of relationship between two entities which can be expressed either by the participants
themselves or the processes Halliday, 2004. In signifying the notions of possession located in the participants, the Token serves the role of possessed whereas the Value
takes the role of the possessor to indicate a property of the possessor, as in ―
The piano
[Token] is Peter’s [Value].‖ Unfortunately, it is fairly visible that it has equal
sense with the one in the attributive clause which makes Thompson 2004 gives an epithet of
problematic
to this type. Moreover, Halliday 2004 strengthens this issue
by stating that the difference is in a very delicate level which is on the shifting of the point of view. If it signifies a membership of certain class, in this case the group of
P eter’s possession, it is the attributive one. On the other hand, if it embodies the issue
of the owner-owned relationship, the identifying one is more appropriate. The second embodiment, which is the process, is encoded in the verbs of possessing which is
typically realized by the verb
own
. The owner participant is the Token whereas the possessed participant is the Value.
In further discussion, the ownership construing is not limited to tangible participants only. Halliday 2004
argues that in construing the sense of ‗owning’, the relationship can be extended to an abstract level. Therefore, some verbs, such as
include
and
involve
, are included in the possessive clause. In the attributive mode of circumstantial type, the possible occurrences are
similar to the possessive one, the Attribute and the Process. The first circumstantial process construes the Attribute by utilizing a circumstantial element which is usually
expressed by a prepositional phrase: ―my story is
about a poor shepherd boy
‖ Halliday, 2004
or an adverbial group: ―she was
there with three Zen master
‖ Halliday, 2004. In the latter one, on the other hand, the circumstance is construed as
the process, thus it is realized by a lexical verb: ―My story
concerns
a poor shepherd boy‖ Halliday, 2004.
As expected, the circumstantial type of identifying mode is similar to the possessive case. The circumstantial element relates two entities which can be
expressed either by the participants themselves or the processes Halliday, 2004. When it features as the participants, both of them are in the same type of
circumstantial element, for instance
a
circ: time =
x
circ: time, as in
tomorrow is the 10
th
. On the contrary, the circumstantial processes are featured in the verbs to construct the relation between the participants Halliday, 2004
, for example, ―this situation
is
apparently
caused
by anomalous low temperatures Halliday, 2004 .‖
Simultaneously, it follows the nature of identifying clause which is reversible.
2.6.1.4 Behavioural clauses
These clauses are considered as the first ancillary clauses in process type which are situated on the borderline between the material and the mental clauses.
These human-like processes are characterized as physiological and psychological behaviour Halliday, 2004. The conscious being who is conducting the behaviour is
bracketed into the Behaver accompanied by the Behaviour as the action which
appears as a participant rather than a process.
Table 2.3 Examples of Process in behavioural clauses Halliday, 2004: 251 [near
mental] processes of consciousness represented
as forms of behaviour look, watch, stare, listen, think,
worry, dream [near
verbal] verbal processes as forms of behaviour
chatter, grumble, talk, gossip, argue, murmur, mouth
physiological processes manifesting states of consciousness
cry, laugh, smile, frown, sigh, sob, snarl, hiss, whine, nod
other physiological processes breathe, sneeze, cough, hiccup,
burp, faint, shit, yawn, sleep [near
material] bodily postures and pastimes
sing, dance, lie down, sit up, down
2.6.1.5 Verbal clauses
In Table 2.4, behaviour clauses can represent seemingly verbal processes in the classes, such as
chatter, grumble
and so forth. These circumstances are possible caused by the similarity of these two types of processes which involve the mental and
material clauses. In verbal processes, though, the mental type is realized in verbal
attitudes Halliday, 2004. Such clauses are usually detected in the creation of narrative in the dialogic passages.
Analogously, these clauses contain several participants: the Sayer, the Receiver, the Verbiage and the Target. As the name indicated, the Sayer is the
participant who initiates the verbal processes. Along with the Verbiage, the Receiver is clustered as oblique participants in which to whom the saying is addressed. The
Verbiage functions as a class of thing which marks the content or nature of the verbal processes. The last participant is the Target which is typically constituted in sub-type
clauses of verbal that forms the targeted entity in the verbal processes.
2.6.1.6 Existential clauses
These clauses complete the types of processes in the experiential line of meaning. These hybrid products of the material and relational processes depict an
existence of something Halliday, 2004.
The entity of being stated as exist is categorized into Existent though this
category is not listed as participant due to the null function in transitivity. The example of these clauses is in
there are books on the table
in which
books
are considered as the Existent.
2.6.2 Circumstances