TRANSITIVITY

Our experience of reality is captured in terms of processes (or "goings-on") -- happening, doing,
sensing, meaning, being, and becoming. These processes constitute the transitivity system of
language, which belongs to the experiential metafunction. In transitivity analysis, then, we explore
how language construes our experience of the world around us.

Basic stuf
Our focus here is on the clause as representation (of our experience of the world). Transitivity is
the resource for construing our experience, and this is done, as noted, in terms of processes.
Revolving around these processes are participants and circumstances, and we'll need to take these
into account as well. Students in the past have often found it difficult to remember the different
types of processes. And the participants that go with them. As well as the circumstances. And the
cow jumping over the moon ...
Let's simplify things. There are six processes. Each process takes a unique set of participants.
(There is one participant, though -- Attribute -- that can appear with two process types. See table
below.) That is to say, given a participant, you should be able to (more or less) identify the
process. And vice versa. Where circumstances are concerned, all such elements are generalisable
across processes; they are not tied down to one or the other process.
This all looks quite confusing at the moment, doesn't it? Let's simplify things even further:

The process is always realised by a VG.

The participant is typically realised by an NG.

The circumstance is typically realised by an AdvG or PP.

Well ... how do we remember the processes? I suggest you use an acronym. The one that works
best
for
me
is
MMVERB,
which
stands
for Material, Mental, Verbal, Existential, Relational,Behavioural. If you adore chocolates
(M&M) and like to talk (VERB), this'll be right up your alley. If not, work out your own acronym.
Since each process takes a unique set of participants, everything else after the MMVERB stage
should fall quite neatly into place, as follows:
Processes

Participants

Material

Actor, Goal, Scope, Attribute, Client, Recipient

Mental

Senser, Phenomenon

Verbal

Sayer, Receiver, Verbiage

Existential

Existent

Relational

Carrier/Attribute, Token/Value

Behavioural

Behaver, Behaviour

Material process
The participants are:

Actor -- the one performing the action

Goal -- that which is affected by the action

Scope -- that which remains unaffected by the action

Attribute -- a quality ascribed or attributed to an entity

Client -- for whom/which the action occurs

Recipient -- the receiver of goods or services

A material process is a process of doing or happening, and the Actor is the key participant. You can
probe a material process with "what did the Actor do?" or "what happened?"
Alvin

played

ping pong

yesterday

Pt:
Actor

Pr:
Material

Pt:
Scope

Circ:
Time

Alvin

swallowed

the ping pong ball

by mistake

Pt:
Actor

Pr:
Material

Pt:
Goal

Circ:
Manner

The doctor

gave

Alvin

some laxative

Pt:
Actor

Pr:
Material

Pt:
Recipient

Pt:
Goal

He

also

made

Alvin

a tablet

Pr:
Material

Pt:
Client

Pt:
Goal

painted

it

green

Pr:
Material

Pt:
Goal

Pt:
Attribute

Pt:
Actor
and

Because the material process involves dynamic verbs, the progressive is permitted -- "Alvin was
playing ping pong yesterday". This is a useful test to tell apart a material process from another that
is inherently stative.
Please note that Goal is that which is affected by something being done to it (that is, it either
changes its position or its status). If it remains unaffected (or unimpacted), it is not Goal, but
Scope.
Another useful point to note is that whereas Recipient takes the preposition "to", Client takes "for".
Compare:

The doctor gave some laxative to Alvin. (Recipient)

He also made a bitter-tasting tablet for Alvin. (Client)

Mental process
The participants are:

Senser -- the one who feels (emotionally), thinks, and perceives

Phenomenon -- that which is felt (emotionally), thought about, or perceived

The mental process has to do with affection, cognition, perception, or desideration (a fancy term
for "desiring"):
I

hate

curly underarm hair

Pt:
Senser

Pr:
Mental

Pt:
Phenomenon

[Affection]

His curly underarm hair

amazed

me

Pt:
Phenomenon

Pr:
Mental

Pt:
Senser

saw

her curly underarm hair

Pt:
Senser

Pr:
Mental

Pt:
Phenomenon

[Cognition]

[Perception]

The mental process is usually in simple present/past tense, but not usually in the progressive
aspect.
Please note that the Senser need not always come first. In "His curly underarm hair amazed me",
the underlined portion is not Senser but Phenomenon.
Verbal process
The participants are:

Sayer -- the addresser

Receiver -- the addressee, or the entity targetted by the saying

Verbiage -- the content of what is said or indicated

Verbal processes include all modes of expressing and indicating, even if they need not be verbal,
such as "showing". The content of what is said or indicated can be realised as a full projected
clause, a participant (verbiage), or a circumstance (matter). See examples below.
The x-ray

shows

a small lump

in Alvin's throat

Pt:
Sayer

Pr:
Verbal

Pt:
Verbiage

Circ:
Location

The doctor

expressed

some concern

Pt:
Sayer

Pr:
Verbal

Pt:
Verbiage

Alvin

complained

about the discomfort

Pt:
Sayer

Pr:
Verbal

Circ:
Matter

He

mumbled

that the ball ruined his appearance

Pt:
Sayer

Pr:
Verbal

[Separate ranking clause]

Existential process
This is the easiest of the lot. It involves existential constructions which are introduced by an
emptythere in subject position (this is sometimes called an expletive there, but don't ask me why).
The typical verb that is used is the "be" verb. So everytime you see an existential construction, you
have an existential process. Simple, right?
Another simple diagnostic is that the progressive is forbidden in the existential process. Whereas
the mental and, as we shall see in a while, relational processes resist the progressive, the
existential process absolutely forbids it.
There is also only one participant in an existential process -- the Existent. The Existent is simply
that which is construed existentially.
Note, however, that in cases such as "On the wall is a handprint", we also have an existential
process, although there is no empty there anywhere. But you know that this construction can be
expanded to "On the wall there is a handprint", no?
Once upon a time

there

Circ:
Time

was

a weird grammarian

Pr:
Existential

Pt:
Existent

Relational process
Relational processes obligatorily require two participants. In a finite clause, you cannot and do not
have a relational process with only one participant. Relational processes are concerned with being,
possessing, or becoming.
The progressive is resisted in the relational process.
The relational process is either identifying or attributive. The difference is this:
Identifying:
"a"
is
Attributive: "a" is an attribute of "X"

the

identity

of

"X"

An identifying process permits the participants to be reversed, together with a corresponding

change in grammatical function. The participants can be reversed in one of two ways -- by the
mere swapping of positions, or through passivisation:
That
man
is
my
[Notice the change in grammatical
is the subject, but in the second
complement in the first clause, but

father
~
My
father
is
that
man
function of the participants -- in the first clause, "that man"
clause, it is the complement. Similarly, "my father" is the
the subject in the second.]

The exam takes up the whole day ~ The whole day is taken up by the exam
[Again, note the change in grammatical function. In the first clause, "the exam" is the subject,
but in the second clause, it is the prepositional complement. Similarly, "the whole day" is the
complement in the first clause, but the subject in the second.]
An attributive process generally does not allow the participants to be reversed. Unfortunately, it
sometimes does. The crucial difference, however, is this -- the grammatical functions of the
participants will always remain unchanged, whether or not they can be reversed. Also, it might be
helpful for you to note that an attributive process can never undergo passivisation:
He
is
blessed
~
Blessed
is
he
[Notice that there is no change in the grammatical function of the participants -- "he" remains
the subject in both clauses, and "blessed" remains the complement in both as well.]
If the process is identifying, the participants are Token and Value. But which is which? You need to
note two things here. First, if the identifying process is able to undergo passivisation, then in the
active form, the subject is always the Token (the Value, of course, is the complement). Second, if
the process cannot undergo passivisation, you will then need the "represent" test to find out which
label to use. What you need to do is to first replace the verb with "represent" to form an acceptable
alternative construction. By this test, you will get "Token represents Value".
Here are some examples:
Today

is

World Belching Day

Pt:
Token

Pr:
Rel-Ident

Pt:
Value

["World Belching Day" serves to identify what today is. Also, we can have "Today represents
World Belching Day", but not *"World Belching Day represents today".]
The champion belcher

is

Alvin

Pt:
Value

Pr:
Rel-Ident

Pt:
Token

[Alvin is identified by his status as a champion belcher. Also, we can have "Alvin represents the
champion belcher", but not *"The champion belcher represents Alvin".]
If the process is attributive, the participants are Carrier and Attribute. Umm ... which is which?
Well, "a" is the attribute, and "X" is the Carrier. Clauses with attributive processes are nonpassivisable. That means that the grammatical subject is always the Carrier. Here are some
examples:
Alvin

was

fantastic

during World Belching Day

Pt:
Carrier

Pr:
Rel-Attr

Pt:
Attribute

Circ:
Time

Alvin

has

a shapely rib cage

Pt:
Carrier

Pr:
Rel-Attr

Pt:
Attribute

It is important to run through the various diagnostics listed here to separate identifying from
attributive processes. For instance, by the reversibility test, a clause such as "The exam lasts the
whole day" is attributive, but "The exam takes up the whole day" is identifying. (This is either
really cool or utterly confusing, depending on your current state of mind.)

Relational processes usually involve the be verb, and are manifested in three ways (use the
reversibility test to find out whether each is attributive or identifying):

"X is Y" (intensive)

"X is at/in/under ... Y" (circumstantial)

"X has Y" (possessive)

Especially for the "X is at/in/under ... Y" type, please take care to label the circumstantial element
as participant, rather than as circumstance. Why? That's because relational processes must have
two participants, remember? So, the PP "in the drain" is functionally ambiguous, depending on the
process type. In "The best hiding place is in the drain", it is a participant (Attribute); in "Alvin
dropped his wallet in the drain", it is circumstance (Location).
Behavioural process
The main participant is Behaver, but may sometimes involve a Behaviour. Behavioural processes
are typically intransitive, involving only the Behaver as participant. If there are two participants,
the second participant is Behaviour.
The behavioural process is a hybrid process -- a material+mental process. Because it is part
mental, the behavioural process involves verbs that are clearly psychological. And because it is part
material, the behavioural process permits the progressive, and the clause can be probed with
"What did the Behaver do?" (which a true mental process forbids).
The sore losers

glared

at the champion belcher

Pt:
Behaver

Pr:
Behavioural

Pt:
Behaviour

[What did the sore losers do?]

In summary
At the risk of sounding long-winded, the important characteristics to note are the following (which
serve as useful probes):

Two processes -- existential and behavioural -- typically have only one participant.

Mental processes are usually in the simple present/past tense.

The relational process must always have two participants. You can't do without one or the
other -- it wouldn't be called relational in that case.

The participants in a relational-attributive clause are generally not reversible. The

participants in a relational-identifying clause are. Even if the participants are reversible in a
relational-attributive process, their grammatical functions do not change. This is unlike the case in a
relational-identifying process where the participants change their grammatical functions as they are
reversed. Reversibility involves not just the mere swapping of positions, but also passivisation.

Whenever be is
used
as
either relational orexistential.

the

main

verb,

the

process

can

only

be

Please note that non-literal language use is very common. So, in a clause like "The road runs
along the river", we do not have a material process, but a relational process (cf. "The road is along
the river").
When in doubt, do the following:

Replace the problematic verb with another more congruent one, without radically altering the
clausal meaning. This is helpful since the relational process, for instance, can be expressed by
verbs other than be.

How many participants are crucially involved? (Some processes need obligatorily two, others
take only one, etc.)

How is the VG expressed? In simple present/past, progressive aspect, etc?

If all things fail, pray hard, and make your best guess.