TRANSITIVITY PATTERNS IN GUY DE MAUPASSANT’S THE NECKLACE: A STYLISTIC

ANALYSIS

Precious C. Miro - Modanza

Abstract

This paper aims to gather new interpretation of Guy De Maupassant’s The Necklace through the
use of stylistics. The new interpretation may reorient or support the most common interpretation of the
short story. Specifically, this paper aims to discover which among the two main characters is involved in
most of the processes. The most number of processes related to a participant unlocked from the story may
suggest the theme and/or the center of the literary piece. Looking for transitivity patterns in prose
literature is one of the most effective style to gather scientific facts that could support the interpretation of
the text. MAK Halliday’s transitivity model is the basis of the critical analysis. Readers will come to
realize that a better understanding of the text can be gathered through the use of stylistic evidence.

1.0 Introduction
According to Barry (2002), stylistics is a critical approach which uses the methods and findings
of the science of linguistics in the analysis of literary texts. Also non-literary texts such as usual
conversations, speeches and printed materials are later been examined using stylistics. To analyze these
texts, various techniques can be used depending on its form. For poetry, it is only fitting to determine the
sound patterns, sound symbolisms, rhythm and meter. While it is of great significance to study the
discourse in drama or play in order to come up with a sound interpretation. However, in dealing with
short stories, the best technique is to look for transitivity patterns.
By the study of transitivity patterns used by the author to introduce his/her characters, readers can
appreciate the literary piece further. There are cases when the intention of the writer is misinterpreted
because the readers fail to explore the processes that are being assigned to the characters in the story. The
results in the researchers’ studies on Oscar Wilde’s The Nightingale and the Rose (Asad, et. al., 2014) and
Virginia Wolf’s Old Mrs. Grey (Cunanan, 2011) prove furthermore that more tangible interpretations of
the text can be gathered when the recurrence of transitivity patterns present in the piece is being
determined. Hence, this paper aims to support the idea that another substantial interpretation can be
gathered when transitivity patterns are being subjected to a thorough analysis.
The text that is being criticize on this paper is Guy de Maupassant’s short story The Necklace.
High school students would often deal Guy De Maupassant short story The Necklace through a literary
approach called liberal humanism. Lessons learned by the students are gathered by the teacher after the
reading and discussion of the text. On the other hand, college students especially majoring in English are
introduced to different literary approaches. Thus, upon the first reading of the story, an instinct would tell
that how women are positioned in the text is essential to tailor its interpretation. For students who have
undergone Stylistics as course, further study by looking for transitivity patterns are made in order to
support such claim. This paper is prepared to discover and prove whether Mathilde in the story is a victim
of a patriarchal society or it is the husband who is being suppressed. MAK Halliday’s transitivity model is
the most effective tool to unravel the truth behind the short story.

2.0 Theoretical Framework

According to M.A.K. Halliday (2014, p. 211), the clause, like any other grammatical unit, is a
multifunctional construct consisting of three metafunctional lines of meaning: the textual line of Theme
(the clause as message) and the interpersonal line of Mood + Residue (the clause as exchange). The third
mode of meaning in the organization of the clause – the experiential line of organization. The three
metafunctional lines are unified within the structure of the clause; textual, interpersonal and experiential
functions are conflated with one another. He further explained that experience consists of a flow of
events, or ‘goings-on’. This flow of events is chunked into quanta of change by the grammar of the
clause: each quantum of change is modelled as a figure – a figure of happening, doing, sensing, saying,
being or having. All figures consist of a process unfolding through time and of participants being directly
involved in this process in some way; and in addition there may be circumstances of time, space, cause,
manner or one of a
few other types. These circumstances are not directly involved in the process; rather they are attendant on
it. All such figures are sorted out in the grammar of the clause. Transitivity is the grammatical system by
which this is achieved.
The transitivity model which was created by M.A.K. Halliday provides the lexicogrammatical
resources for construing a quantum of change in the flow of events as a figure – as a configuration of
elements centered on a process. Processes are construed into a manageable set of process types. Each
process type constitutes a distinct model or schema for construing a particular domain of experience as a
figure of a particular kind – a model such as the one illustrated above for construing signification (2014,
p. 213)
There are three main types of processes in the English transitivity system which are material,
mental and relational. Although there are processes that are categorized and placed in between them. The
process used in a certain clause can be determined through the main verb of a clause. To differentiate one
process from the other, it is important to comprehend the difference between the inner and outer
experience. The outer experience involves the physical actions that are being done in the physical world.
Whereas, the inner experience involves psychological activities which effects may be revealed
physiologically.
Material process is concerned with our experience of the material world. It answers the question
‘What did x do?’ The actions are most of the time physical and tangible such as happening as being
created, creating, changing, doing, and acting. The two participants in material process are the Actor or
the doer of the action and the Goal or the receiver of the action. In addition to these two roles (Halliday,
2014), there are a number of other participant roles that may be involved in the process of a material
clause; these are: Scope, Recipient, Client and (more marginally) Attribute.
Unlike material process, mental processes are concerned with our experience of the world of our
own consciousness. Mental process answers the question: ‘What do you think/ feel/know about x?’
According to Halliday (2004), in a clause of mental process, there is always one inherent participant who
is human; this is the Senser or the one that senses, feels, thinks, wants or perceives. The Phenomenon
shows what is being felt, thought, or seen by the conscious Senser.
The third major type of transitivity process is relational which serves to characterize and to
identify. Halliday states that the fundamental properties of relational clauses derive from the nature of a
configuration of ‘being’ (2004, p.213). A relationship of being is set up between two separate entities.
Since there are three main types of relation in English - intensive, possessive and circumstantial and each
of these types comes in two distinct modes of being – ‘attributive’ and ‘identifying’, different terms are
referred to the participants in relational process. In attributive mode, participants involved in the process
are the Carrier and the Attribute while in identifying mode, participants are labelled as the Value and the
Token.
The three main transitivity processes mentioned above account for the majority of all clauses in
the text. Each has a distinct kind of structural configuration that can easily be recognized. However, three
subsidiary types of processes are later recognized and located at each boundaries of the three main
processes.
The least distinct of all processes which is behavioural process lies between material and mental
processes. It represents the outer manifestations of inner workings, the acting out of processes of
consciousness and physiological states. The participant which usually a conscious one is called the
Behaver.
On the borderline of mental and relational is the category of verbal process. The process of a
verbal clause is realized by a verbal group where the lexical verb is one of saying (Halliday, 2014). A
Sayer is responsible for the verbal process. Usually two more participants are added to the Sayer. These
are the Receiver, the one to whom the message is directed and the Verbiage, the nominalised statement of
the verbal process.
The sixth process is existential that lies on the borderline between the relational and the material.
It is concerned with existence, representing something that exists or happens. The only participant in this
process is the Existent which follows the there is /are sequences.

Table 1. Examples of different process of transitivity from Guy de Maupasant’s The Necklace
Type of Example Sentences
Process
Material She tore open the paper and drew out a card…
Behavioural …she looked at the dirty walls…
Mental She dreamed of vast living rooms…
Verbal At last she answered hesitantly…
Relational She was one of those pretty and charming girls…
Existential It was Madame Forestier…

The six processes that construe the participant’s experience of the world mirror the roles that
they play in a literary piece. Thus, the analysis of processes present in a certain literature is of great
significance.

3.0 Results and Discussion

The following adaptation of Guy de Maupassant’s The Necklace was analyzed through the use
M.A.K Halliday’s model of transitivity. It has an objective of finding recurring processes being used in
the text and participants who are being involved in such processes.

She [Value] was [Pr. Relational] one of those pretty [Token] and charming [Token] girls born, as if
by an error of fate, into a family of clerks. She [Carrier] had [Pr. Relational] no dowry [Attribute], no
expectations[Attribute], no means of becoming known, understood, loved or wedded [Attribute], by a
man of wealth and distinction; and so she[Actor] let [Pr. Material] herself [Goal] be married to a minor
official at the Ministry of Education [Recipient].
She [Carrier] dressed [Pr. Relational] plainly [Attribute] because she [Carrier] had never been able
[Pr. Relational] to afford better [Attribute] but she [Value] was [Pr. Relational] as unhappy [Token] as
if she [Carrier] had once been [Pr. Relational] wealthy [Attribute]. Women [Carrier] don't belong [Pr.
Relational] to a caste or class [Attribute]; their beauty, grace, and natural charm [Actor] take [Pr.
Material] the place of birth and family [Goal]. Natural delicacy, instinctive elegance and a quick wit
[Senser] determine [Pr. Mental] their place in society, and make [Pr. Material] the daughters of
commoners [Goal] the equals of the very finest ladies [Attribute].
She [Senser] suffered [Pr. Mental], feeling she was entitled to all the delicacies and luxuries of life
[Phenomenon]. She [Senser] suffered [Pr. Mental] because of the poorness of her house [Phenomenon]
as she [Behaver] looked [Pr. Behavioural] at the dirty walls, the worn-out chairs and the ugly curtains.
All these things that another woman of her class would not even have noticed, tormented [Pr. Mental] her
[Senser] and made [Pr. Mental] her [Senser] resentful [Phenomenon]. The sight of the little Brenton girl
who did her housework filled [Pr. Mental] her [Senser] with terrible regrets and hopeless fantasies
[Phenomenon]. She [Senser] dreamed [Pr. Mental] of silent antechambers hung with Oriental tapestries,
lit from above by torches in bronze holders, while two tall footmen in knee-length breeches napped in
huge armchairs, sleepy from the stove's oppressive warmth [Phenomenon]. She [Senser] dreamed [Pr.
Mental] of vast living rooms furnished in rare old silks, elegant furniture loaded with priceless ornaments,
and inviting smaller rooms, perfumed, made for afternoon chats with close friends - famous, sought after
men, who all women envy and desire [Phenomenon].
 When she [Behaver] sat down [Pr. Behavioural] to dinner at a round table covered with a three-day-
old cloth opposite her husband [Sayer] who, lifting the lid off the soup, shouted [Pr. Verbal] excitedly,
"Ah! Beef stew! What could be better, [Verbiage]" she [Senser] dreamed [Pr. Mental] of fine dinners, of
shining silverware, of tapestries which peopled the walls with figures from another time and strange birds
in fairy forests [Phenomenon]; she [Senser] dreamed [Pr. Mental] of delicious dishes served on
wonderful plates, of whispered gallantries listened to with an inscrutable smile as one ate the pink flesh of
a trout or the wings of a quail [Phenomenon].
She [Carrier] had [Pr. Relational] no dresses [Attribute], no jewels [Attribute], nothing [Attribute];
and these were the only things she [Senser] loved [Pr. Mental]. She [Senser] felt [Pr. Mental] she
[Carrier] was made [Pr. Relational] for them alone. She [Senser] wanted [Pr. Mental] so much to
charm, to be envied, to be desired and sought after [Phenomenon].
She [Value] had [Pr. Relational] a rich friend [Token], a former schoolmate [Attribute], at the
convent, whom she [Senser] no longer wanted [Pr. Mental] to visit because she [Senser] suffered [Pr.
Mental] so much when she [Actor] came [Pr. Material] home. For whole days afterwards she [Behaver]
would weep [Pr. Behavioural] with sorrow, regret, despair and misery.

In the above analysis, the most number of type of clause is mental. Fourteen out of fifteen mental
clauses are participated by the senser, Mathilde. The second highest number of type of clause is relational.
There is a total of ten relational clauses. Nine relational clauses are attributes and/or tokens of Mathilde.
The first six paragraphs were solely tailored to describe both Mathilde and the situation she is in. By the
transitivity used by the author, he described how women are. Women thinks and ponders for the most of
time, especially when they have regrets. Perhaps she reflects some women who yearns to be beautiful and
marry a rich man.

<2>
One evening her husband [Actor] came [Pr. Material] home [Scope] with an air of triumph, holding a
large envelope in his hand.
"Look, [Verbiage]" he [Sayer] said [Pr. Verbal], "here's something for you. [Verbiage]"
She [Actor] tore open [Pr. Material] the paper [Goal] and drew out [Pr. Material] a card
[Goal/Sayer], on which was printed [Pr. Verbal] the words:
"The Minister of Education and Mme. Georges Rampouneau request the pleasure of M. and Mme.
Loisel's company at the Ministry, on the evening of Monday January 18th. [Verbiage]"
Instead of being delighted, as her husband had hoped, she [Actor/ Sayer] threw [Pr. Material] the
invitation [Goal] on the table [Recipient] resentfully, and muttered [Pr. Verbal]:
"What do you want me to do with that? [Verbiage]"
"But, my dear, I thought you would be pleased. You never go out, and it will be such a lovely
occasion! I had awful trouble getting it. Everyone wants to go; it is very exclusive, and they're not giving
many invitations to clerks. The whole ministry will be there. [Verbiage]"
She [Behaver/ Sayer] stared [Pr. Behavioural] at him angrily, and said [Pr. Verbal] impatiently,
"And what do you expect me to wear if I go? [Verbiage]"
He [Senser] hadn't thought [Pr. Mental] of that [Phenomenon]. He [Sayer] stammered [Pr. Verbal]:
"Why, the dress you go to the theatre in. It seems very nice to me ... [Verbiage]"
He [Behaver] stopped [Pr. Behavioural], stunned, distressed to see his wife crying. He [Sayer]
stuttered [Pr. Verbal]:
"What's the matter? What's the matter? [Verbiage]"
With great effort she [Actor/Sayer] overcame [Pr. Material] her grief [Goal] and replied [Pr. Verbal]
in a calm voice, as she [Actor] wiped [Pr. Material] her wet cheeks [Goal]:
"Nothing. Only I have no dress and so I can't go to this party. Give your invitation to a friend whose
wife has better clothes than I do. [Verbiage]"
He [Carrier] was [Pr. Relational] distraught [Attribute], but tried again:
 "Let's see, Mathilde. How much would a suitable dress cost, one which you could use again on other
occasions, something very simple? [Verbiage]"
She [Senser] thought [Pr. Mental] for a moment, computing the cost, and also wondering what
amount [Phenomenon] she could ask for without an immediate refusal and an alarmed exclamation from
the thrifty clerk.
At last she [Sayer] answered [Pr. Verbal] hesitantly:
"I don't know exactly, but I think I could do it with four hundred francs. [Verbiage]"
He [Carrier] turned [Pr. Relational] a little pale [Attribute], because he [Actor] had been saving [Pr.
Material] that exact amount [Goal] to buy a gun and treat himself to a hunting trip the following summer,
in the country near Nanterre, with a few friends who went lark-shooting there on Sundays.
However, he [Sayer] said [Pr. Verbal]:
"Very well, I can give you four hundred francs. But try and get a really beautiful dress. [Verbiage]"

From the above scenario, there are a total of seven material clauses. Five of which have Mathilde
as the actor. The number of verbal clauses is also noticeable. Six out of ten verbal clauses have Loisel as
the sayer, the other four have Mathilde as the sayer. Verbiages that were uttered by Mathilde are always
accompanied by actions. Mathilde’s reluctant behaviour are oftentimes reciprocated by the husband’s
sweet and thoughtful treatment towards her. It seemed that Loisel wants to please his wife and is afraid to
make her unhappy. As a result, he is willing to offer everything for her sake.

<3>
The day of the party drew near, and Madame Loisel [Carrier] seemed [Pr. Relational] sad [Attribute],
restless [Attribute], anxious [Attribute]. Her dress [Carrier] was [Pr. Relational] ready [Attribute],
however. One evening her husband [Sayer] said [Pr. Verbal] to her:
"What's the matter? You've been acting strange these last three days. [Verbiage]"
She [Sayer] replied [Pr. Verbal] "I'm upset that I have no jewels, not a single stone to wear. I will look
cheap. I would almost rather not go to the party. [Verbiage]"
"You could wear flowers, [Verbiage]” he [Sayer] said [Pr. Verbal], "They are very fashionable at this
time of year. For ten francs you could get two or three magnificent roses. [Verbiage]"
She [Carrier] was [Pr. Relational] not convinced [Attribute].
"No; there is nothing more humiliating than looking poor in the middle of a lot of rich women.
[Verbiage]"
"How stupid you are! [Verbiage]" her husband [Sayer] cried [Pr. Verbal]. "Go and see your friend
Madame Forestier and ask her to lend you some jewels. You know her well enough for that. [Verbiage]"
She [Sayer] uttered [Pr. Verbal] a cry of joy.
"Of course. I had not thought of that. [Verbiage]"
The results gathered from the above paragraphs show an equal number of verbal clauses for both
Madame Loisel and her husband. The results suggest that there is a fair exchange of conversation between
the husband and the wife.

<4>
The next day she [Actor/Sayer] went [Pr. Material] to her friend's house and told [Pr. Verbal] her of
her distress [Verbiage].
Madame Forestier [Actor/ Sayer] went [Pr. Material] to her mirrored wardrobe [Recipient], took out
[Pr. Material] a large box [Goal], brought [Pr. Material] it [Goal] back, opened [Pr. Material] it [Goal],
and said [Pr. Verbal] to Madame Loisel [Receiver]:
"Choose, my dear. [Verbiage]"
First she [Senser] saw [Pr. Mental] some bracelets, then a pearl necklace, then a gold Venetian cross
set with precious stones, of exquisite craftsmanship [Phenomenon]. She [Actor/Behaver] tried on [Pr.
Material] the jewelry in the mirror [Goal], hesitated [Pr. Behavioural], could not bear to part with them,
to give them back. She [Sayer] kept asking [Pr. Verbal]:
 "You have nothing else? [Verbiage]"
"Why, yes. But I don't know what you like. [Verbiage]"
Suddenly she [Actor] discovered [Pr. Material] in a black satin box, a superb diamond necklace
[Scope], and her heart began to beat with uncontrolled desire. Her hands [Carrier] trembled [Pr.
Relational/Attribute] as she took it. She [Actor/Behaver] fastened [Pr. Material] it [Goal] around her
neck, over her high-necked dress, and stood [Pr. Behavioural] lost in ecstasy as she [Behaver] looked
[Pr. Behavioural] at herself.
Then she [Sayer] asked [Pr. Verbal] anxiously, hesitating:
"Would you lend me this, just this? [Verbiage]"
"Why, yes, of course. [Verbiage]"
She [Actor] threw [Pr. Material] her arms around her friend's neck, embraced [Pr. Material], her
rapturously, then fled [Pr. Material] with her treasure.
There are a total of ten material clauses gathered from the above analysis. Mathilde is responsible
for the six material clauses. The rest were acted by her friend Madame Forestier. Also, there are a total of
three behavioural clauses, all of which are credited to Mathilde. There is also an equal distribution of
verbal clauses between Mathilde and Madame Forestier.

<5>
The day of the party arrived. Madame Loisel [Carrier] was [Pr. Relational] a success [Attribute]. She
[Value/Carrier] was [Pr. Relational/ Pr. Relational] prettier [Token] than all the other women, elegant
[Attribute], gracious [Attribute], smiling [Attribute], and full of joy [Attribute]. All the men
[Behaver/Actor] stared [Pr. Behavioural] at her, asked [Pr. Material] her name [Scope], tried [Pr.
Behavioural] to be introduced. All the cabinet officials [Senser] wanted [Pr. Mental] to waltz
[Phenomenon] with her. The minister [Senser] noticed [Pr. Mental] her [Phenomenon].
She [Behaver] danced [Pr. Behavioural] wildly, with passion, drunk on pleasure, forgetting
everything in the triumph of her beauty, in the glory of her success, in a sort of cloud of happiness, made
up of all this respect, all this admiration, all these awakened desires, of that sense of triumph that is so
sweet to a woman's heart.
She [Actor] left [Pr. Material] at about four o'clock in the morning [Attribute]. Her husband [Actor]
had been dozing [Pr. Material] since midnight in a little deserted anteroom with three other gentlemen
whose wives were having a good time [Attribute].
He [Actor] threw [Pr. Material] over her shoulders [Recipient] the clothes [Goal] he had brought for
her to go outside in, the modest clothes of an ordinary life, whose poverty contrasted sharply with the
elegance of the ball dress [Attribute]. She [Senser] felt [Pr. Mental] this [Phenomenon] and wanted [Pr.
Mental] to run away [Phenomenon], so she [Phenomenon] wouldn't be noticed [Pr. Mental] by the other
women [Senser] who were wrapping themselves in expensive furs.
Loisel [Behaver] held [Pr. Behavioural] her back.
"Wait a moment, you'll catch a cold outside. I'll go and find a cab. [Verbiage]"
But she [Behaver/ Actor] would not listen [Pr. Behavioural] to him, and ran [Pr. Material] down the
stairs. When they [Value] were [Pr. Relational] finally in the street [Token], they [Senser/Actor] could
not find [Pr. Mental] a cab, and began [Pr. Material] to look for one, shouting at the cabmen they saw
passing in the distance.
They [Actor] walked [Pr. Material] down toward the Seine in despair [Recipient], shivering with cold
[Attribute]. At last they [Behaver] found [Pr. Behavioural] on the quay one of those old night cabs that
one sees in Paris only after dark, as if they [Carrier] were [Pr. Relational] ashamed [Attribute] to show
their shabbiness during the day.
They [Value/Actor] were [Pr. Relational] dropped off [Token] at their door in the Rue des Martyrs,
and sadly walked up [Pr. Material] the steps [Scope] to their apartment [Recipient]. It [Carrier] was [Pr.
Relational] all over [Attribute], for her. And he [Senser] was remembering [Mental] that he had to be
back [Phenomenon] at his office at ten o'clock.
 In front of the mirror, she [Actor] took off [Pr. Material] the clothes [Goal] around her shoulders
[Scope], taking a final look at herself in all her glory. But suddenly she [Behaver] uttered [Pr.
Behavioural] a cry. She [Value] no longer had [Pr. Relational] the necklace round her neck [Token]!

On the beginning paragraphs which showcase the day of the party, it is still Mathilde who is
acting and behaving most of the time. Additional actor is found on the above analysis – they. There is a
transition from Mathilde doing most of the actions to ‘they’ – Mathilde and Loisel. This may suggest that
the couple does things together in certain cases.

< 6 >
"What is the matter? [Verbiage]" asked [Pr. Verbal] her husband [Sayer], already half undressed.
She [Behaver] turned [Pr. Behavioural] towards him, panic-stricken.
"I have ... I have ... I no longer have Madame Forestier's necklace. [Verbiage]"
He [Actor] stood up [Pr. Material], distraught [Attribute].
"What! ... How! ... That's impossible! [Verbiage]"
They [Behaver] looked [Pr. Behavioural] in the folds of her dress, in the folds of her cloak, in her
pockets, everywhere. But they [Senser] could not find [Pr. Mental] it [Phenomenon].
"Are you sure you still had it on when you left the ball? [Verbiage]" he [Sayer] asked [Pr. Verbal].
"Yes. I touched it in the hall at the Ministry. [Verbiage]"
"But if you had lost it in the street we would have heard it fall. It must be in the cab. [Verbiage]"
"Yes. That's probably it. Did you take his number? [Verbiage]"
"No. And you, didn't you notice it? [Verbiage]"
"No. [Verbiage]"
They [Behaver] stared [Pr. Behavioural] at each other, stunned. At last Loisel [Actor] put [Pr.
Material] his clothes [Goal] on again.
"I'm going back, [Verbiage]" he [Sayer] said [Pr. Verbal], "over the whole route we walked, see if I
can find it. [Verbiage]"
He [Actor] left [Pr. Material]. She [Value] remained [Pr. Relational] in her ball dress all evening,
without the strength to go to bed, sitting on a chair, with no fire, her mind blank [Token].
Her husband [Actor] returned [Pr. Material] at about seven o'clock [Attribute]. He [Actor] had found
[Pr. Material] nothing [Attribute].
He [Actor] went [Pr. Material] to the police, to the newspapers to offer a reward, to the cab companies
[Recipient], everywhere the tiniest glimmer of hope led him.
She [Behaver] waited [Pr. Behavioural] all day, in the same state of blank despair from before this
frightful disaster.
Loisel [Actor] returned [Pr. Material] in the evening [Attribute], a hollow, pale figure [Attribute]; he
[Actor] had found [Pr. Material] nothing [Attribute].
"You must write to your friend, [Verbiage]" he [Sayer] said [Pr. Verbal], "tell her you have broken the
clasp of her necklace and that you are having it mended. It will give us time to look some more.
[Verbiage]"
She [Actor] wrote [Pr. Material] as he [Sayer] dictated [Pr. Verbal].

Loisel seems to be in a ‘spotlight’ in the above analysis. Seven verbiages have Loisel as its sayer
while the other four messages have Mathilde. Also, the most number of material clauses – eight out of
nine – is participated by him. It seemed that there are changes in roles at this point of the story.

<7>
At the end of one week they [Actor] had lost [Pr. Material] all hope [Goal].
And Loisel [Sayer], who had aged five years, declared [Pr. Verbal]:
"We must consider how to replace the jewel. [Verbiage]"
 The next day they [Actor] took [Pr. Material] the box [Goal] which had held it, and went [Pr.
Material] to the jeweler [Scope] whose name they found inside. He [Actor] consulted [Pr. Material] his
books [Goal].
"It was not I, madame, who sold the necklace; I must simply have supplied the case. [Verbiage]"
And so they [Actor] went [Pr. Material] from jeweler to jeweler [Scope], looking for a necklace like
the other one [Client], consulting their memories, both sick with grief and anguish [Attribute].
In a shop at the Palais Royal, they [Actor] found [Pr. Material] a string of diamonds [Goal] which
seemed to be exactly what they were looking for. It [Carrier] was [Pr. Relational] worth forty thousand
francs [Attribute]. They [Actor] could have [Pr. Material] it [Goal] for thirty-six thousand [Attribute].
So they [Behaver] begged [Pr. Behavioural] the jeweler not to sell it for three days. And they [Actor]
made [Pr. Material] an arrangement [Goal] that he [Actor] would take [Pr. Material] it [Goal] back for
thirty-four thousand francs if the other necklace was found before the end of February.
Loisel [Value] had [Pr. Relational] eighteen thousand francs [Token] which his father had left him.
He [Actor] would borrow [Pr. Material] the rest [Goal].
And he [Actor] did borrow [Pr. Material], asking for a thousand francs from one man, five hundred
from another, five louis here, three louis there [Goal]. He [Actor] gave [Pr. Material] notes [Goal], made
[Pr. Material] ruinous agreements [Goal], dealt [Pr. Material] with usurers, with every type of money-
lender [Scope]. He [Behaver] compromised [Pr. Behavioural] the rest of his life, risked [Pr.
Behavioural] signing notes without knowing if he could ever honor them, and, terrified [Pr.
Behavioural] by the anguish still to come, by the black misery about to fall on him, by the prospect of
every physical privation and every moral torture he was about to suffer, he [Actor] went [Pr. Material] to
get the new necklace [Client], and laid down [Pr. Material] on the jeweler's counter [Recipient] thirty-six
thousand francs.
When Madame Loisel [Actor] took [Pr. Material] the necklace [Goal] back, Madame Forestier
[Sayer] said [Pr. Verbal] coldly:
"You should have returned it sooner, I might have needed it. [Verbiage]"
To the relief of her friend, she [Actor] did not open [Pr. Material] the case [Goal]. If she [Senser] had
detected [Pr. Mental] the substitution [Phenomenon], what would she [Senser] have thought [Pr.
Mental]? What [Verbiage] would she [Sayer] have said [Pr. Verbal]? Would she [Behaver] have taken
[Behavioural] her friend for a thief?

In the above analysis, there is a large number of material clauses. Both the actors Loisel and
‘they’ are the recurrent participants of the material clauses. It is either Loisel or they who have solved
their problem. There is only one material clause Mathilde had participated – the taking back of the
necklace back to Madame Forestier.

<8>
From then on, Madame Loisel [Senser] knew [Pr. Mental] the horrible life of the very poor
[Phenomenon]. But she [Actor] played [Pr. Material] her part [Goal] heroically. The dreadful debt
[Value] must be [Pr. Relational] paid [Token]. She [Actor] would pay [Pr. Material] it [Goal]. They
[Behaver] dismissed [Pr. Behavioural] their maid; they [Actor] changed [Pr. Material] their lodgings
[Goal]; they [Actor] rented [Pr. Material] a garret under the roof [Goal].
She [Senser] came to know [Pr. Mental] the drudgery of housework, the odious labors of the kitchen
[Phenomenon]. She [Actor] washed [Pr. Material] the dishes [Goal], staining her rosy nails on greasy
pots and the bottoms of pans. She [Actor] washed [Pr. Material] the dirty linen, the shirts and the
dishcloths [Goal], which she [Actor] hung [Pr. Material] to dry on a line [Scope]; she [Actor] carried [Pr.
Material] the garbage [Goal] down to the street [Recipient] every morning, and carried up [Pr. Material]
the water [Goal], stopping at each landing to catch her breath. And, dressed like a commoner [Attribute],
she [Actor] went [Pr. Material] to the fruiterer's, the grocer's, the butcher's [Scope], her basket on her
arm, bargaining, insulted, fighting over every miserable sou.
Each month they [Actor] had [Pr. Material] to pay some notes, renew others, get more time.
 Her husband [Actor] worked [Pr. Material] every evening, doing accounts for a tradesman, and often,
late into the night, he [Behaver] sat [Pr. Behavioural] copying a manuscript at five sous a page.
And this life [Value] lasted [Pr. Relational] ten years [Token].
At the end of ten years they [Actor] had paid off [Pr. Material] everything, everything, [Goal] at
usurer's rates and with the accumulations of compound interest.
Madame Loisel [Carrier] looked [Pr. Relational] old [Attribute] now. She [Value] had become [Pr.
Relational] strong [Token], hard [Token] and rough [Token] like all women of impoverished households.
With hair half combed, with skirts awry, and reddened hands, she [Behaver] talked [Pr. Behavioural]
loudly as she [Actor] washed [Pr. Material] the floor [Goal] with great swishes of water [Attribute]. But
sometimes, when her husband was at the office, she [Behaver/Senser] sat down [Pr. Behavioural] near
the window and thought [Pr. Mental] of that evening at the ball [Phenomenon] so long ago, when she
[Carrier] had been [Pr. Relational] so beautiful [Attribute] and so admired [Attribute].
What [Actor] would have happened [Pr. Material] if she had not lost that necklace? Who [Senser]
knows [Pr. Mental], who [Senser] knows [Pr. Mental]? How strange [Attribute] life [Carrier] is [Pr.
Relational], how fickle [Attribute]! How little [Value] is [Pr. Relational] needed for one to be ruined or
saved [Token]!

The most number of processes evident on the above analysis is the material processes being acted
by Mathilde. Since the scene above focuses on the consequences that Mathilde and her husband must face
brought about by the loss of the necklace, the analysis above proves that Mathilde did more tangible
actions.

< 9 >
One Sunday, as she [Actor] was walking [Pr. Material] in the Champs Élysées [Goal] to refresh herself
after the week's work [Client], suddenly she [Senser] saw [Pr. Mental] a woman walking with a child
[Phenomenon]. It was [Pr. Existential] Madame Forestier [Existent], still young, still beautiful, still
charming.
Madame Loisel [Senser] felt [Pr. Mental] emotional [Phenomenon]. Should she [Sayer] speak
[Verbal] to her [Receiver]? Yes, of course. And now that she [Actor] had paid [Pr. Material], she [Sayer]
would tell [Pr. Verbal] her [Receiver] all. Why not?
She [Actor] went up [Pr. Material] to her [Client].
"Good morning, Jeanne. [Verbiage]"
The other [Senser], astonished to be addressed so familiarly by this common woman, did not
recognize [Pr. Mental] her [Phenomenon]. She [Sayer] stammered [Pr. Verbal]:
"But - madame - I don't know. You must have made a mistake. [Verbiage]"
"No, I am Mathilde Loisel. [Verbiage]"
Her friend [Behaver] uttered [Pr. Behavioural] a cry.
"Oh! ... my poor Mathilde, how you've changed! ... [Verbiage]"
"Yes, I have had some hard times since I last saw you, and many miseries ... and all because of you! ...
[Verbiage]"
"Me? How can that be? [Verbiage]"
"You remember that diamond necklace that you lent me to wear to the Ministry party? [Verbiage]"
"Yes. Well? [Verbiage]"
"Well, I lost it. [Verbiage]"
"What do you mean? You brought it back. [Verbiage]"
"I brought you back another exactly like it. And it has taken us ten years to pay for it. It wasn't easy for
us, we had very little. But at last it is over, and I am very glad. [Verbiage]"
Madame Forestier [Carrier] was [Pr. Relational] stunned [Attribute].
"You say that you bought a diamond necklace to replace mine? [Verbiage]"
"Yes; you didn't notice then? They were very similar. [Verbiage]"
And she [Behaver] smiled [Behavioural] with proud and innocent pleasure.
 Madame Forestier [Actor], deeply moved, took [Pr. Material] both her hands [Goal].
"Oh, my poor Mathilde! Mine was an imitation! It was worth five hundred francs at most! ...
[Verbiage]"

Based on the results from the above analysis, the above setting focuses on the conversation
exchanged between Mathilde and Madame Forestier. The fourteen verbal process gathered from the
above analysis includes that of the implicit sayers.

Table 2. Number of Types of Process for each Character in Guy de Maupassant’s The Necklace
Types of Processes/ Material Mental Relational Behaviou Verbal Existent
Characters Attribute Token ral ial
Mathilde 31 23 15 5 16 22 0
Loisel 19 2 3 0 5 19 0
They
(Mathilde and 14 2 1 2 5 0 0
Loisel)
Madame Forestier 7 3 1 0 3 12 1
Others 6 6 4 3 2 3 0

Based on the results of the analysis, Mathilde is the participant who performed most of the
processes. The recurrent transitivity pattern present in the story is the material processes acted by her. The
most number of relational processes have the purpose of describing and identifying her. This shows the
importance of giving the readers the picture of Mathilde – a woman without beauty nor money. The large
number of both the mental processes and behavioural processes related to her is also noticeable. This
result may suggest that the story centers in the actions that a woman is capable of doing when haunted by
her thoughts. Her unhappiness brought upon the lack of beauty and money have caused her yearn for
them. Though, mental processes deal with one’s own consciousness, it is astonishing how it motivates a
person to do definite actions.
Loisel, Mathilde’s husband also performed a number of material processes. It only shows that as
a husband, he performed his duties on helping the wife in the midst of adversities. The story also centers
on the conversation exchanged by the characters. By the verbiages they uttered, the author had also
emphasized the equality of the characters.
In addition, a fair amount of material clauses are performed by both Mathilde and her husband
Loisel. This result implies the connection between the two. Being husband and wife, at times they
perform tasks together with an aim of accomplishing the same goal.
Because there is only one existential process present in the story; that is given to Madame
Forestier. Therefore, the story does not give much importance on the existence of the main characters.
Rather, this suggests that the story is indeed focusing on the material, mental and behavioural processes –
how simple thoughts can affect someone’s behaviour and actions.

CONCLUSION
The primary aim of this paper is to gather new interpretation of Guy De Maupassant’s The
Necklace through the use of stylistics. By looking at the transitivity patterns recurrent in the short story,
the most number of type of processes is revealed. The analysis has unveiled who among the main
characters was involved in most of the processes. The result suggests a new interpretation of the text that
can be added to the old interpretations of the short story. Indeed, readers can gather additional
interpretation of the text when transitivity patterns that recur in the piece is being discovered.

REFERENCES
Asad, M., et.al. (2014). Transitivity analysis: representation of love in Wilde’s The Nightingale and the
Rose. Retrieved May 13, 2017 from www.idpublications.org
Baluran, C. (2016). Introduction to language & style: a stylistic toolkit. Philippines: West Visayas State
University Publishing House.
Barry, P. (2002). Beginning theory, 2nd Ed. United Kingdom: Machester University Press.
Halliday, M.A.K. & Matthiessen, C. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar, 3rd Ed. Retrieved
May 13, 2017 from www.uel.br
Halliday, M.A.K (2014). Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar, 4th Ed. Retrieved May 26, 2017
from http://edisciplinas.usp.br