alam, m. (2020). continuous relevance to ‘unspeakable

AdvancesinSocialSciencesResearchJournal–Vol.7,No.1PublicationDate:Jan.25,2020DoI:10.14738/assrj.71.7708.

Alam, M. (2020). Continuous Relevance to ‘Unspeakable Wrongness’ in Orwell’s A Hanging: A Transitivity Analysis. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 7(1) 492-518.

Copyright©SocietyforScienceandEducation,UnitedKingdom 492

ContinuousRelevanceto‘UnspeakableWrongness’inOrwell’sAHanging:ATransitivityAnalysis

Md.SaifulAlamLecturerinEnglish,

UniversityofCreativeTechnology,Chittagong.Bangladesh

ABSTRACT

This paper is an interdisciplinary study of Orwell’s queer-literary genre piece i.e. “AHanging”withaninsightintothe“unspeakablewrongness”acrossthat1931shortstory/essayby theapplicationofHalliday’s linguistic toolof“Transitivity”.The functionallinguistictheoryoftransitivityisveryinstrumentalinexploring“ideationalmeaning”about the “on-goings” of characters’ material and mental world as expressed anddocumented in literature.Albeitcomparatively lessnoticed,Orwell’s “AHanging” isasuperb experiential documentation of his intolerance and disapproval of allunspeakablewrongnessinallformsfoundin“colonialism”,“imperialism”,and“capitalpunishment”,discoveryofallofwhichthroughthestoryhasanextendedsignificanceand current century relevance.The study comesupwith a convincing “cosmopolitancall” for the abolishment of capital punishment. Orwell goes as a narratormentallyalooffromhisimperialistfellowsandstandsasone“oddout”withadeciphered“anti-imperialistic” impulse inside him which marks out colonialism as the very wrong“metamorphosing” power that is in itself demoralizing and makes it a hugeimpossibilityof“equity”amonguniversalhumanity.Orwellendedupwitha“Geliliolicdiscovery”of imperialismpaving thewayofonly “oppressionanddeprivation”of thecolonized and injecting a “generic moral decay” inside them; so Orwell cuts hisprofessional “cohortship”with this giant,wrong, inhuman system that practices far-fetched,unconvincing“powerimbalance”onearthbytakingawaythepowerlessraces’“freedom of speech”, and that bursts into a large scale of “moral decay” and“hollowness”ofhumanhearts.KEYWORDS:Hanging,Orwell,colonialism,transitivity,capitalpunishment,imperialism

INTRODUCTION

Orwellstudyhaslongbeenafocalinterestforthescholarswhoparticularlyconsiderexploringdeep into “colonialism” and “post colonialism”. Amongst all the writers with these themesanchoredandgatheredintheirwritings,Orwellisthemostwidelyreadandinfluentialseriouswriterofthe20thcentury”(Meyers,2010).Hiswritingsserveasthedocumentationofhowhisownbig belonging part of British imperialistswere going around colonizingdistant,diverselandsacrossglobeespeciallyAsiaandAfrica.Fromveryclosequarters,Orwellcameupwithhis individual, painful observation of the English super power’s colonizing others’ lands,imposing ruthless rules, alienmanners and customs, and religious beliefs on the indigenousracesandgroupswhohavetheirownlonglivingidentitiesandvalues,andculturalpatterns.Hewasaccumulatingastrongzealandenthusiasmtofight“fascism”andtodefenddemocracyfrom“a senseofobligation” (ibid)ashispolitical stance.Also inspiredby the samezeal andresponsibility and ethics, Orwell in his writer’s capacity was making his “written voice” ofunspokenintoleranceanddisapprovalofallkindsofflawsandinhumanpracticesintheBritishcolonialism.Hispassive-active“reluctance”toacceptthe“wrong-headed”actionsandpoliciesoftheimperialistsobviouslycomeupinhiswritings.

AdvancesinSocialSciencesResearchJournal(ASSRJ) Vol.7,Issue1Jan-2020

Copyright©SocietyforScienceandEducation,UnitedKingdom

493

Orwell’s specialty as an English writerwith Englishness was that he took up and followedthrough a “seeing andsaying” (McKenzie, 1982) personality and voice. So, self-criticizing byonewithinmanywaswhatheledto“self-construction”ofadifferentOrwelltravelling,serving,seeing, and saying time and again in different “places” and “times” including one of hisprofessionalbaseinBurma.“Utopiananddystopian”worldsacrosstheglobeshapedthroughpromises of different “isms” and both the “promise makers” and “promise breakers” aredepicted in his satirical, fiction and non-fictionwritings. So, a universal theme of hypocrisy,destruction,construction,criticism,andallthepointedwrongnessinallthemistakenonasamissiontopassthroughamessageofa“commonhumanity”despiteallpolarizeddivisionsanddissidenceyet to find”uniformity”afterall.Orwell’swritingsarethuswortheverreadingtolocateanalltime’srelevancetoredefiningandre-assessingthecurrentcenturypolarizedanddissidentsocietieswithanintended“self-criticism”and“self-construction”inthepoliciesforameaningful,inclusivepubliclifeandsealingthedealsofallbestpoliticalandsocialpracticesontheearthofequity.As well as having a great “critical faculty” reflected in his writings, Orwell was as much“prophetic” as Johnson (ibid). His message for a cosmopolitan “equity” across the globe isechoed through hiswriting,which carries 21st century relevance to understanding the trueimageof independence,politics, government,democracy, legislationandaboveallhumanity.So,Orwelljuxtaposedthecontrastingscenesof“humiliation”and“hope”ofthehumanracesinmanykindsofhiswritings.Especially,his“anti-imperialistic”motivationsarewellpropagatedin“ShootinganElephant”,“NineteenEighty-Four”,“AnimalFarm”andinsomeothers.Suchasimilarideologicalsightisthe“seminalground”inhis“AHanging”too,butitgoesunnoticed.Itwouldbe,therefore,arenewedinterestandsignificancetostudyhis“timelessvoice”(Orwell,&Weis,2015)that“goesnaked”(Meyers,2010)abouthiscriticismofEnglishcolonistsdespiteoncehisbeingabelongingpartofit.Thatistosay,asupplementarycoloniststudyiscrucialtocarry out on Orwell’s “A Hanging” that serves as an additional proof of his choice of anti-colonial ideology and censoring of the “pessimism” in all the inhuman aspects of colonialsystems including capitalpunishment, andamodernhumanistic trend for the “permanence”(WOLOCH,2016)ofuniversalhumanityallovertheearth.ThisstudysetsouttoillustratethevalueofOrwell’spointedpessimismabout,denouncingof,anddissidencetotheunspeakablewrongnessofcolonialism,imperialism,andcapitalpunishmentinhisexceptionalgenrepiece,“AHanging”.

LITERATUREREVIEWInternationalperspectivesonhanging:“Capitalpunishmentisalsoknownasthedeathpenaltyorexecutionandisthepunishmentofacriminal offender by killing” (Schultz, 2014). It was a legal system of inflicting maximumexemplarypunishmenttothecriminalsconvictedofcapitalcrimeslikekilling.Itstartedinthemedievalperiodacrosstheworld.Inliterature,“thefirstrecordedexecutionbyhangingwasinHomer'sOdysseyandwascarriedoutviasuspensionhanging”(Thompson,2019). Evenitisreportedthathangingbesidesbeingthecapitalpunishmentwastooa“sightofentertainment”in places in ancient times. Clark (2009) reports that “often amacabre, graphic exercise inphysicalmutilation,capitalpunishmentwasonceahighlypopularformofentertainmentforthemasses,aswellasservingthedeathpenaltytocriminals-man,womanandchildalike…”.This gives birth to a question of moral judgment and a reflection of human sickness whenhumansdelightintheforcefuldeathofanotherhumanbeing.Actually,theeventofhangingisnotsomethingtobepublic;ithastobeexecutedinprivate.However,hangingasacapitalpunishmenthasbeenasubjectmatterofhugeargumentsbothfor and against it. In some countries, hanging is still inflicted though,manymore countries


494 URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.71.7708.

startedabolishingitasacruel, inhumanandbarbaroussystemofkillingalivingmanbackinthedays. InancientRome, in553, capitalpunishmentbyhangingwasabolishedbya statueentitledPoreiaLexorPorcianLaw.Exilewas substituted fordeath. (OhioGeneralAssembly.House of Representatives, Durbin War, 1853). International perspectives on capitalpunishmentconvincedthatcapitalpunishmentis“uselessandinhuman”(Schabas&Schabas,2002).Thus,internationally,capitalpunishmentstartedgraduallybeingabolished.InAmerica,around the 19th century, abolitionist movement grew and Michigan first abolished capitalpunishment permanently in 1846. Venezuela and Portugal abolished capital punishment in1867(ibid).Thus,intotal,sofar102countrieshavedejureabolishedcapitalsentencingforallcrimes. However, still fifty –eight countries -mostlyMuslim and Asian ones- still retain thisseriously debatable barbarous system (Chandler, 1976). Precisely, the opponents of capitalpunishment consider it as barbarous cruelmethod of punishment. They make a point that“experiencedemonstratesthatcapitalpunishmentneveryetmademenbetter”(Stolz1873).Itisasystematicdesiretocausepainandinstantaneousdeathofahumanbeing.Lifesentence,forty years or so in prison, is thought to be more efficacious, self-corrective punishmentsystem.Besides,itisalsoreportedthat“thedeathpenaltyisactuallytwotothreetimesmoreexpensivethan life imprisonment”(Barkan,2011).So,hanging is thetwofold lossof lifeandmoney.Moneycanbeearned,butlifecannotbe.Again,thelostmoneycanberegainedbutalost life isnevereverpossible togetback.There is, of course, a conflictingview that for theinterest of justice and fair treatment towards a convicted person, let’ say, guilty of capitalcrimes and also towards the affected, capital punishment sounds appropriate andproportionate to capital crimes. But, which is preferred – punishment or cruelty? Killingsomeone is easier thanpunishing thembecause topunish someonemeans to cause them tosufferphysicallyandmentallyforlongwhiledeathpenaltyisaninstantphysical“finality”bykilling.Orwell’sbiographicalconnectionhighlightedinhiswritings:Apparently,literatureislikeevertheveryexpressionoflifeandexperienceseitherofothersorof the authors themselves, at least occasionally. Thackeray (1884) puts that literature isessentially the expression of experience and emotion- of what we see. We as the readersalways tend to connect and translate the facts and fiction found in a writing into thebiographical basis as part of the whole thing. As obviously as I recollect from my ownexperience,daysbeforeIwroteapostonFacebookabout“pornographyaddiction”genericallyenough, but one of my Facebook friends sought to figure out something of my personalpornography addiction to do with the basis of writing of the post, which he so curiouslymentioned in his comment following the post. Eventually, somemodern literary theoriessuch as post-structuralism happen to cut literature off authors, categorically declaring thatthereisnofixedmeaningofatext;readerscan,notanysurpriseifthey,makenewmeaningsindependent of the author. Nevertheless, rejecting the idea that author’s biographicaltemptationdoesn’tgettodowiththewritingispracticallyimpossible.Infact,towinscholarlythecallofgoodbuildbetweenauthor’sbiographyandcloserlookintothewrongnessdepictedinhis“AHanging”,Orwell’slifehistoryespeciallyofhiscrucialpolicecareerdaysinBurmaissosignificanttolookbackat.Tonotemostimportantlyisthat“…biographyis”,inJohnstonandBailey’swords(1906),“theliteratureoflife.Allliteratureistheexpressionoflifeofsomekind;andsincethenoblestlifeishumanlife,theliteraturethatdealswithhumanlifeisthenoblestliterature.”First of all, Orwell’swritings are said to have its “roots in utopian and dystopian literature”Mendes,(2019), which is in Orwell’s case a literary motivation for improvement of thecolonizers’ systems in the alien lands and on people, relying on the substantial basis of thespeculated perfect life for persons in every aspect-economic, social, cultural, ecological,



495

politicalandsoforth.Borninaonce-prosperbutgraduallydecliningfamily,OrwellspentfewyearsofhischildhoodinBurmaandthenmovedtoEngland.Again,whilehiscontemporarieswere still at university in England, Orwell joined the British imperial police and took hispostinginBurmain1922ashismaternalgrandmotherwasinBurma,apartofthethenBritishIndia.He served a countof five years inBurmawith a several changesof stations andwithvaryingresponsibilities.However,Orwellfelt,asStansky&Abrahams(1994)report,“anoddmanout”amonghisBritishfellows.Hedidn’tlikethe“theboringroutineofpolicelife”(ibid),whichwasasignaledcallinsideforbeingawriter.Whatheobservedduringtheseyearswasallheneithercouldaccustomhimselftonorthinkoforsupportmorallyandfromallbasicsofmoralintuition.So,hewasmetamorphosinghimselfwithinandwastryingtogetridofalltheinexplicable oppression and unspeakable truth about British practices, and the economic,socialandpoliticaleffectsofcolonialism.So,Orwelleventuallyin1928,quitthepoliceserviceand went back to England. Concurrently, he also discovered that England had its ownoppressed.And,eventually,heturnedouttobeawriter.DrawnonhispersonalexperienceinBurmaservicedays,hewrotehisfirstnovel,"BurmeseDays"(1934)which“satirizedthewhiteman's club, where imperial traders, soldiers and civil servants ritually confirmed theirsuperiority” (Jellinek, 1972). His famous essays-"A Hanging" (1931) and "Shooting anElephant"(1936)-sumuphisfeelingsaboutthehumiliation”(Smith,2019)thathedevelopedduring his days as an imperialist police officer in Burma. This penance of Orwell’s soul inBurma collective with the obvious harbinger of sufferings and oppression, domination,inferioritiesbytheregimesandcontinuingfrustratingexperienceofthelower-middleclassesin England is extended into his writing. Hadden & Luce (1983) remark that “Shooting anElephant (1936) portrays "the dirtywork of Empire at close quarters.” Precisely, “all of his[Orwell’s]booksareobviouslybaseduponhisownexperiences”(Rodden&Rossi,2012).Morespecifically, his “AHanging” is , as (Tymieniecka, 2002) comments , “ a personal experienceessay” and it is based on the impulse of a psychological tension, and amoral contradiction,proceduraldecorumandunaffectedattitudesofallpresentinthehangingspot–bothnativesandimperialists.TheessaydepictsthatOrwellfeelsbotheredthroughouttheeventofhangingtoseethe“unspeakablewrongness”ofcapitalpunishment.ThisstudyattemptstofindouthowOrwell’schoiceoflanguageguaranteesandassistsinstrumentallytoachieveasmuchapparentexpressionofhisaversiontoanddisapprovalofhanging/capitalpunishmentaspossible.Orwell’santi-imperialfocus:Even thoughOrwellwasabelongingpart of the imperialists,his careerdaysasan imperialofficerandincapacityofhiscloseconnectionandobservation,foundthedarkdiscriminatoryand extra-degrading attitude and treatment of the colonizers on colonized Burma,which issomething that has got to do with Orwell’s long- way anti-imperialist mindset anduncomfortableliterarytracktracedinhiswritingssometimesmasked,sometimesunmasked.Thishassafelybroughthimanall-timeappellationi.e.“anti-imperialist”(Alam,2006,Donmez,2012). His posting in Burma as a police officer traumatized his inside during the time’ssamplesofimperialists’workings,andalsoitcompoundedhisdilemmabetweenimperialists’ruling systemsand thenatives’ eventualhelplessness,discomfort,dislikes,despair all takingplace unspoken and unprotested. This iswhatOrwell figured out that something gotwrongwhich doesn’t fit for humans after all. So, being mentally and spiritually paralyzed by theBritishers’ high level of nonsense of horror, most worrying practice, torture and economicoppression and cultural aggression and so forth on the colonized races, Orwell grew aconscience-striken temptation and gut to go into about all this in his writings. Thus, hiswritingssuchas“shootinganElephant”,“AHanging”,“BurmeseDays”reflecthowheuseshispenaroundtalkingabouttheimperialistwrongnessandcharacterandagenuinelevelofbeliefandurgeforachangeinthecolonizingsystemswhichnativesdidn’thavethatfeatandmastervisionary hearts to stand against, as a matter of fact. It’s true that there is no unanimous



agreement about Orwell’s being “pro-imperialism” and “anti-imperialism”, it is rather astrongerpointthat ‘ineachofhisBurmesestoriestheBritisharedepictedasmorallylackingand the racially mixed indigenous people are resolutely inferior beings: timid, puerile andcomical,withacoupleofvillainousexceptions’(Melia,2015).Early19th century’s IndustrialRevolution,England firstgot fromwithina reformationboostandwave,andsecondlyitthen,bytheircourage,ambition,anddetermination,startedreachingoutandmakingAfricaandAsiatheircolonieswithamarketingandeconomicmission.Overacouple of centuries, the British turned “global hegemon and adopted the role of globalpoliceman”(SCHWEIZER,2001).So,inrealpractice,“policing”inanyknownformmeansonekind power that forces others to obey them as an organization and their rules withoutquestions.Sometimes,inplaces,“police”hasbeensynonymousforthreatsandfearwhich,asamatteroffact,drivestheconventionallyandculturallyweakerorharmlessraces,bydefault,toreceiveoppressionsandimmoraltreatmentbeyondtheirallreluctanceandintolerance.Suchhasuniquelybeenworthcapitalism,communismandimperialism,colonialismandevenpost-colonialism.Practically,OrwellendedupbeinganimperialpoliceofficerpostedinBurma.So,hehadwitnessedandeventuallywasmentallydisturbedbytheexplicitandimplicitevidenceof pains and pangs caused towards the harmless natives by all the human badness of theimperialists.SuchasanaffectingimpressioncouldhavejustasmuchastroubledOrwellwhomighthavebeen inheart a followerof the cosmopolitangolden rule that “one should treatothersasonewouldlikeotherstotreatoneself”(Ferrara,2013).So,toassumeavoiceforwhohavenovoiceandchoice, to identify the flawsand foulswith thepowerful, and to celebrateand to advocate equality and advantages and co-existence for the powerless in mind areOrwell’s implicit or explicit power and philosophy that he carried in himself, by which heimaginedthebetterthroughhiswriting.Tosumup,Orwellafterallwassettledinmindwithhisactivestancetopoint, inhiswritings,all thepointlesswrongness(Walker,1991)that theimperialists had been going with in their times in Burma and everywhere, and troublinghumansboundbytheirenormousthreats, fear,andallbadexperiences,whichhastoogot aliteraryevidenceinhisexceptionallyvaluablegenreworki.e.“AHanging”.Heletsout“Isawtheunspeakablewrongness,ofcuttingalifeshortwhenitisinfulltide”(Gilroy,2005).Studiesdoneandthegapthisstudydealswith:George Orwell is, with right evaluation and appreciation, recognized as “a writer with atimelessvoice” (Orwell&Weis,2015). Andsurely,outof allhiswritingseitheroff thoseofpolitical types, or in there of his social literary sites, and in fact any kind of his writingreflectingavoicebefittingauniversal appealandapplicability, it isdefinite thathemakes itwhichispassingonthroughtimes.So,itwouldbesomethingofacarelesslevelifhiswritingsarenotunveiledandreadwithanall-time’sthematicconcernandrelevencesoastocatchupthewriter’s belief and voices on situations and systems of the society, state and rulers andmanymorethanthatwhichfolloworassociateinandaroundhiswritings.Althoughit’slikethestory,“AHanging”islessattended(foranyreasonwhateverdoesn’taddup really) than it should need, no other piece is better than it to start out themakings of a“doing-understanding”aboutOrwellasthegloballycelebratedanti-imperialist.In absolute appreciation of the essay, Rodden, however, (2014) goes to put forward anevaluation that his “A Hanging” is so influential and self-interacting a story that it helpedOrwell in soul, spirit and conscience develop into amature, true Orwell as he is essentiallyknown today. So, the story / essay (there is a genre debate) serves as a breakthrough forOrwell’s literary career with a discomfort and hate for the protected, powerful crafts ofsystems of imperialism i.e. all experienced and imposed ideologically, culturally and



497

geographically“troublemakingthings”ontheweaker,harmlessnatives,whichcalledOrwell’spen to importantly make a medium for its expression and connection to the senses of allaffected hearts. Therefore, the essay, as a literary campaign and documentary of animperialist’s “within-voice” for a change of hanging, shooting and other things going andhappening on theways, cannot be a long lost essay anyway; it deserves a renewed readingattentionfromanyonewithepiczealofcuriosityforacompleteOrwellstudystartingjustfromtheearlypiece“AHanging”tofindoutallthenextthingstocomeupinhisfollowingwritings,nomatterwhat.TheeventofhangingofanativeBurmese,whichmovedOrwellasanarratorandobserverofit,andwhichplantedaseedofquestionofhanging’svaliditydeepintohim,iscuriouslycheckedoutmorewithironicalimpressionsintheessay“AHanging”,anditisunderstoodasanironyoftheeventofagonizingcrucifixionofJesusChrist(Nababan,2010).So,takingtheeventtothisheight,ironicallythough,impliesthatOrwell’spassionate,authenticexperienceandwitnessingofhangingissoinvolvingintermsofarespondingfocusonthesystematickillingofahumanbeing. Right under this very attitude and feeling about hanging, the theme of itswrongnessunspoken isratherspoken inareallyappreciatingway-whatevermuchatasuperficial levelbut quite a lotmore than thatwith his guided linguisticmajesty and choices of language tomakeafuller,deeperandgravermeaningandrealizationofthesystem.Thepresentstudy isactuallyconvincedthatOrwell isnecessarilyattended,appreciated,andadmitted but his one of the questioning and thought-provoking essay / short story “AHanging”,whichhasmade itselfdifferent ingenreandstraight,significant thematic issue i.e.hanging, isnotasmuchsufficientlyandwellexploredfromapossiblyscholarlyoutlook.Thestudy considers that “A Hanging” by Orwell is like a turned-out-to-be-an- unconventionalgenre.Probablythereisnosuchthingasconfusingandleadingtodebatewiththestory’sformandstyles.Moreimportantlythanbeingano-matchgenrebuilt,thestoryisinpurposetruly,wonderfully thewords for thequiet,andsuperblyspokenfor theunspoken.Ultimatelyclearthrough Orwell’s language efforts and skills exploited in the story, the serious “theme ofunspokenwrongness”isdocumented,whichthisstudyaimstomakeascholarlyexplorationofand an access to the theme to attach a due literary value to Orwell’s outstanding piece ofwriting,“AHanging”.Theoryoftransitivity:Asalinguistictoolwithsomucheffectonlanguageanalysisatclauseleveltounderstandhowthat can construct meaning across the choices of verbs as a meaning making grammaticalcategory,TransitivityisapartofHalliday’sfamousSystemicFunctionalGrammar(SFG)whichhe developed under Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL). In his grammar theory, Hallidaysuggests that transitivity is the grammar of the clause as a structural unit for expressing aparticularrangeof‘ideationalmeanings’.Traditionally,transitivityisinprescriptivegrammaraverbthathasatleastoneobject,evenoftentwo(Rayhan,2011).However,inhisIntroductiontoFunctionalGrammar,MAKHalliday(1985)cameupwithanewconceptoftransitivity.ForHalliday, transitivity still refers to a verb, however, regardless of an object. He describesverbs as ‘processes’. Hence, Halliday’s transitivity is referred to as ‘transitivity processes’.Thisis,infact,themeaningmakingprocess.Infact,Hallidayafterallconsiderslanguageasasystemformakingmeanings(Lemmens,1998).Halliday’s transitivity canbe found inhis famousSystemicFunctionalLinguisticsasshownbelowinthispage.Haliday(1971)andotherlinguistslikeMartin(1992),intheirimmediategoalofstylisticsanalysis, aimed“toshowwhyandwhat textmeansandhow itdoes”.Thisschoolof linguists established that themeaningof a text isproduced through two typesof



contexts namely (a) context of culture, and (b) context of situation. Furthermore, Halliday(1985) postulated that the meaning is also determined by three metafuntions namely (i)ideational or experiential, (ii) interpersonal, and (iii)textual. “... Each metafunction is a'systemic cluster ... it consists of 'clusters of semantic systems' which make meanings”(Nodoushan,2014).Astransitivityisamechanismoftransmissionofideas,soitfindsitsrootin‘ideational’functionoflanguage(seethefollowingfigure).

(Cunanan,2011)Transitivityanalysisinanytext,asHalliday(1985)says,referstoanalyzinglanguageattheclauselevel.IntheSFGframework,Halliday,(1981:42)definesaclauseas“thesimultaneousrealizationofideational,interpersonalandtextualmeanings.” Ingeneral,aHallidianEnglishclause has three main parts: ‘participant’ (noun groups) + ‘process’ (verbs) + ‘participant’(noun groups). Besides, there may be another element in a clause which Halliday calls‘circumstances’(adverbials,prepositionalphrases). Ifso, theclausestructuremayalsolooklike “participants + process + participant + circumstances”. However, circumstances mayoccur at the start, or in themiddleor at the endof a clause. An example fromOrwell’s ‘AHanging’:It [participant] was [process] in Burma [circumstance] a sodden morning of rains[participant].So, “verbs” in Hallidian typical clauses are called “processes”. Processes are the mostimportant element of a clause. Wu (2008) comments, only “through the analysis of verbprocesses in thetexts,thewaythetextrepresentssocialactionscanbebetterunderstood”.Inhis‘AnIntroductiontoFunctionalGrammar(IFL)’,Halliday(1985)describedsixtypesofprocessesi.e.sixtypesofverbsthatlanguageusersmakechoicesoftomakedifferenttypesofmeaningsforcommunicativepurposesindifferentgenresystems:Materialprocess:It is aprocessof“physicaldoingoraction”.Bytheseactions, theoutsidematerialworldoflanguage usersmakesmeaning. The action is carried out by an ‘actor’ (participant in thesubjectplace)andtoanentity(participantintheobjectorcomplementplace)whichiscalleda‘goal’.Theactordoesthedoingandthegoalisaffectedbytheaction.Burke(2017)explains“therearedifferentkindsofmaterialprocesswhichaccountforthescopeof ‘materialness’”.Anexamplefrom‘AHanging’:

“Theprisoners[actor]can’tget[materialprocess]theirbreakfast[goal].”



499

Burke presents a table of a choice based on various permutations of a clause in differentmaterialprocessstructureswhereintheprocesssignifyingactioniseverytimethesame:

(Burke,2017,p.51)

Fromthetable,Burkesummarizesthatinallexamplestheconstantelementis theProcess,“thedoing”i.e.“kicking”.However,in(a)Davidisintheactiveroleofdoingwhilein(b)hisactive role of “doer” is undergrounded. Then, in (c) the prominence role of the goal isforegroundedwiththedoeromittedwhilein(d)theactionisinsuperventionwiththedoerexcised.Mentalprocess:Mental process refers to the process of “mental actions” by five human senses i.e. ‘seeing’(eye), ‘hearing’ (ear), ‘smelling’ (nose), ‘tasting’ (tongue), and ‘feeling’ (mind). By theseactions, the languageusers bring their insideout;mentalprocessdepictswhat is goingoninside(inthemind)ofalanguageuserasasocialbeing.Theparticipantinthesubjectplaceplays the role of a ‘senser’ and the participant in the object place plays the role of a‘phenomenon’.Anexamplefrom‘AHanging’:

I[senser]watched[mentalprocesses]thebarebackoftheprisoner[phenomenon].Hallidaysub-dividesmentalprocessintothree(Halliday,1994citedinBurke,2017):

(i) Perception(seeing,hearingetc.),(ii) AffectionsometimesknownasReaction(liking,fearing,loving,hating),and(iii) Cognition(thinking,knowing,understandingetc.)

Burkeshowstheabovethreesub-typesofMentalprocessesasinthefollowingtable:

(Burke,2017,p.53)



Relationalprocess:Itistheprocessofdescribing,identifying,characterizingandpossessing.Morespecifically,itisthe Transitivity category of recognizing an entity’s ‘being’or ‘having’. Bloor & Bloor (2013)explainsthatthetypicalrelationalprocesslookslike“XisY”.Thetypicalverbsintherelationalprocessarecopularonesi.e.be,look,seem,appear,sound,turn,andverbsofpossessionsuchashave,own,possess.Relationalprocessesarefurthercategorizedintotwo:

(i) IdentifyingRelationalProcess(IRP):IRPisemployedtoidentifytheworld(everyentityintheworld).TheparticipantsinanIRPclauseare“Identified”(nounornounphraseinthesubjectplace),and“identified”(thenounornounphraseinthecomplementplace)asinthefollowingclause(fromAHanging:

He[Identified]was[relationalprocess]aHindu[identifier].Inthisclause,thepersonin xophoric reference (he) is identified as “a Hindu” meaning he is a man of aparticularreligiousbelief.

(ii) AttributingRelationalProcess(ARP):

AnARPclausecolorstheworld(everyentityoftheworld)withdifferentattributesaspositive, negative etc. The participants in an ARP clause are “carrier” (noun or nounphrase in thesubjectplace),and“attribute”(adjective in thecomplementplace)as inthefollowingclause(fromAHanging):

Eachcell[par:NP:career]was[pro:relational:intensive]quitebare[par:attribute].Inthisclause,eachprisoncellgetsadescriptionwithanattributei.e.“quitebare”.

Behavioralprocess:Itreferstotheprocessof‘behaving’.Actually,behavioralprocessoverlapsmaterialandmentalprocessbecausetheverbsrefer tophysicalandmentalactionsthroughabehaver’sbehaviortowards an entity get exposed. So, Fuller (2019) says, “behavioral processes exist betweenmaterialandmentalprocess”.Hallidayliststhebehavioralprocessasthecategoriesofactionssuchas “breathing” “smiling”, “dreaming” “coughing” (ibid).Theonlyoneparticipant in thebehavioralprocessplaystheroleof‘behaver’(nounornounphraseinthesubjectplace)asinthefollowingexamplefrom‘AHanging’:

Severalpeople[behaver]laughed[behavioralprocess].Verbalprocess:Verbal processes refer to verbal actions through which characters bring their inside out.Fontaineetal(Eds.)(2013)pointthattheprototypicalverbalprocessis“saying”,andothersinclude telling, asking, insulting, praising, shouting, announcing etc. A verbal process hasthreeparticipants-Sayer ,ReceiverandVerbiage.TheparticipantinthesubjectplaceistheSayerwhosayssomething. Eggins2004)addsthat“theSayer ,theparticipantresponsibleforaverbalprocess,doesnothavetobeconsciousparticipant(althoughit typicallyis)butanythingcapableofputtingoutasignal.” SomethingwhichissaidistheVerbiageandtowhomtheverbalmessageisdirectedistheReceiver.Anexamplefrom‘AHanging’:

‘For God’s sake hurry up, [verbiage] Francis [receiver]’, he [sayer] said [verbalprocess]terribly[circumstance].

Existentialprocess:Existentialprocessreferstoaclassofverbsthatdenotethatsomethingexistsorispresentinreality. Eggins (2004) puts, “Existential processes represent experience by positing that'therewas/is something'. Conventionally, an existential process clause employs a ‘There +verb to be + participant’ structure. Eggins clarifies that “there’ doesn’t have a



501

representationalmeaning,anditdoesn’trefertoanypaceasitdoesinothercases.Thereisonlyoneparticipantfunctioningasan‘Existent’.Aninstancefrom‘AHanging’:

Therewas[existentialprocess]aclankingnoise[existent].Abriefintroductionto‘AHanging’:George Orwell’s ‘A Hanging’ published in August 1931 is a short story (sometimes calledessayaswell)basedonanexecutionofaHindumaninBurmawitnessedbyOrwellhimselfinthecapacityofbeingaBritishpolicecadet,alessexperiencedobserverofexecutionthanhiscolleagues .BritainmadeBurma,aprovinceof IndianEmpire,colonyofBritishEmpireandruleditfrom1824-86.Duringhissixyears’serviceintheBritishImperialPolicefrom1922-1927 in Burma, Orwell on an uncomfortable occasion witnessed the capital punishmentbeing carried out. Being an inexperienced police officer, hewas not that used towatchinghanging.Hewasmoved by the incidentofhanging.He says in ‘AHanging’, “… Ihad neverrealizedwhat itmeans to destroy a healthy, consciousman.” He felt that a hangingwas awrongact.Heobservesunspokenwrongness ’’ofcuttinga lifeshortwhen it is in full tide.”The very title ‘A Hanging’ is interesting. It is not ‘The Hanging’. A hanging refers to allhangings ingeneral. So, the story carriesOrwell’s attitude towardshanging ingeneral as awrongsystem. InthewordsofBallengeret al (2005) “Orwell's"AHanging," is “anessay inwhich Orwell narrates a hanging he witnessed. The piece, which argues against capitalpunishment…”Someprevioustransitivityanalyses:Nguyen (2012) points out that transitivity analysis made a start with Halliday’s (1971)noteworthystudyonWilliamGolding’s ‘TheInheritor’.Thisisaclassicworkontransitivityanalysis. For Carter and Stockwell (2008), it is as one of the groundbreaking analysis instylistics.Sincethenresearchershaveappliedtransitivityanalysis timetotimeinexploringhow language structures produce certainmeanings and ideology in a literary text and alsolanguageuse inotherdomains likenewspapers. Transitivitywas investigatedbyHubbard(1999)oncharacterization inSalmanRushdie’s ‘TheMoor’sLastSigh’.Hubbardthroughhisanalysistriestoputvalueon‘transitivityanalyses’asavehicleofexplicatingreaderresponsetocharactersinfiction.In2009Yaghoobicarriedoutasystemicanalysis.Heinvestigatedthesamenews actors in twonewspapers namedNewsweek andTheKayhanInternational. Hisanalysisshowedthat thetwomediawereideologicallyopposedtoeachotherandthesamenews actors were represented as opposed to each other. In 2011, Cunanan, a PhDresearcher, attempted to analyze Virginia Woolf’s ‘Old Mrs. Grey’ using transitivity as aframeworkinastylisticanalysis.Itillustratesthatbyattendingtoauthor’slinguisticchoicesreaders can reproduce the elusive and subjective mind style of that author or persona.Song’s (2013) transitivity analysis of ‘A Rose for Emily’ explains processes and theirfunctionsinthebuildingofthethemeandcharactersinthetext.Mehmoodetal.(2014)usedtransitivityasatooltoinvestigatethatlanguageformsperformacommunicativefunctioninWilde’s ‘The Nightingale and the Rose.’ Ezzina (2015) came up with a piece of work oftransitivityanalysisonThomasPychon’s‘TheCryingofLot49’.Theanalysisupholdsthefactthat transitivityanalysiscanunveil the linguistic techniquesemployedbythepostmodernwriterslikePychon.

FINDINGSANDANALYSISOF“AHANGING”:The study split all the Transitivity processes after clause parsing and came up with apercentage of six types of transitivity and the experiential meanings made out by themthrough the text. How Orwell’s choice of these processes altogether represents his anti-imperialistic view and argument against the wrongness in the capital punishment systemrunsasbelow:



Materialprocesses:Themajority“processes”of‘AHanging’arematerialprocesseswhichis(+/-115)189.08%ofthetotal.ItsuggeststhatOrwell’sportrayalofahangingasawrongdeedismainlybasedonthe physical actions of the different actors in the transitivity framework. Besides, thedominanceofmaterialprocessesinthestorysignifiesthattheparticipantsarebasicallydoersand theyarebusydoing physical things.Maybe, this isbecauseahangingbasically involvesphysical doers and doings; it involvesmany physical activities. Orwellmakes choices of thedominant material processes to build an image of what’s going on in the seen, physicalexecutionspotinordertoputendtoaliving-like-ushuman“physique”.Theregoesanadagethat“seeingisbelieving”.Orwellseesanexecutionbuthewasmovedbyitandwasfeelingithardtobelievehowitcanworkoutkillingamanbyallthephysicalactionssuchasthecruelestone“hanging”.Asfoundinthisstudy,internationally"hanging"islookeduponas“barbarous”.So,theexecutionandtheinvolvedpeoplecarryingoutthepartsofdutiesrepresentthe“worst”ofsomecruelestphysicalactions.Interestingly,thematerialprocessesastransitivitychoicesintheessay “AHanging” canpresent thebestsummaryof thewhole storyand is fairlyable torepresentthethemeofworst“unspokenwrongness”ofhangingasasystem.The“actors”of60/61materialclausesarehumans.AsstatedintheTransitivitytheory,actorsof a material process can be either conscious being or inanimate objects. Practically, in anexecution spot basically several responsible humans involve and perform many physicalactions,which accounts forwhy the predominant “actors” are “humans”whose actions aresupposedtoaffectespeciallyonehumanbeing,thehangedHinduman.Ofallthehumanactors,the prisoner (the hanged) is the actor in only 8 processes, and interestingly all of them aregoal-less. Itmeans that the prisonerwas helpless and inactive in the hanging spot, and hisactions were not able to affect the entities around him. This helplessness is the natives’accepted fate in the face of the imperialists’ cruel systems and rules. Such a completehelplessnessofthenativeBurmeseHindumantothecolonists’systemofcapitalpunishmentlooked as “unforgiving” for Orwell, not for the bulky, British, brutal force. To describe thepublic material action of hanging, Orwell employs this predominant number of materialtransitivityprocessesintheessay.Therestof thehumanactorsincludethe(i)“imperialists”whokill thehelplessnative, (ii) “thenarrator”who ismoreof curiousandmore involved inmental processes, (iii) the “fellow prisoners” and (iv) “warders”who are again” powerless”becausetheybelongtotheclassofthehanged.ThesefellowshaveturnedlesssensitiveovertheperiodofBritishruleintheirland,andtheyhavebeenusedtoseeingtheeventsofhangingasquitenormal,unaffectingincidents.Maximum material processes do not have goal participants. For example, “Thesuperintendent]grinned”.ItimpliesthatOrwellismoreconcernedabouttheactionsandthedoersintheprocessofhangingratherthanthegoalsonwhichthereflectionoftheactionswillfall.ItmayalsosuggestthatOrwellwantstoshowthattheactorsareselfengagedintheeventofhangingwhichhepresentsasawrongsystemtothepathof“visionaryhumanism”.Beingananti-hangingBritishpoliceofficer,Orwellobservescloselyhangingeventandbroodsdeepintotheissueandfeelsunabletoalignhimselfwiththesystem.Only 25/26 processes are goal directed of which the actors are mainly the warders andprisoners. That is the prisoners in general are pushed by the imperialist authority and theyquestionablypartaketheexecutionactivitiesofoneoftheirowncommunitywithoutshowingany practically functioning sympathy and reluctance because they have put on a habitualslavery’s covering on their existence. Now, they don’t even bother seeing country men’sinhuman,cruelkillinginthesystemofthecolonialists.12goalsareeithertheprisonerortheprisoner’sbodyparts.Thisimpliesthatboththeimperialistsandthehelpless,hopelessnative



503

actorsaffecttheentitiesespeciallythewould-behangedman.ThisalsomeansthatthenativesturnedthebeckandcalloftheEnglishauthoritythatmadetheminvolveinalmostalldoingsdirectedtohanging.Thenarrator,Orwell,participatesinonlytwogoal–directedprocesses,whichmayaccountforhis indifferenceorapathy toward the inhumanactofhanging. Itsuggests thatOrwellputsawallofreluctancetowardscapitalpunishment.Ashewasanoviceofficeraroundthattime,hedidn’t actively partake the physical actions with enthusiasm in order to gather practicalexperiencesofhowtoexecute;hewasinsteadinthespeculatinghimselfwithhisanti-hangingcampaignwhile scanningeverydetail of the situationon theexecutionspot.Hewas settlingstrongly with the disapproving way he thinks of hanging. In fact, Orwell witnessed manyevents of hanging; “far toomany peoplewere hanged duringOrwell's time inBurma…”Rai(1990). As earlier stated, Orwell’s biographical connection to his writing resulted in hiscuriosityanditwasredirectedtotheseriousmoderninquiryandjustificationofthevalidityofhanging as a system rather from his supposed professional part of engagement inaccomplishmentoftheeventofhanging.Theunderlyingmeaningpotentialofhisanti-capitalpunishmentgetsobviousexposure inhis language choiceof transitivity forhimself asbeinginvolvedasanactorintheleastnumberofmaterialprocesses. Beingabelongingpartofimperialpowerandpractice,Orwellcan’tbesodirectinonenaturalsense though, his anti-imperialist mind and attitude is still understood in the patterns oflanguagechoicehemakesinthenarrationoftheevents,besideshisbiographicalevidenceofhis “anti-imperialist” gutas stated in this study. The inhumanactofhanging isput insomepassive voice constructions at syntactic level with an omission of the actors. “The job [ofhanging] was done’’ is one, for example. Basically, this kind of transitivity construction ofMaterialprocessiswhatBurkecalls“action-orientation”.Therefore,Orwellemphasizesgenericdisapproval of the action of hanging as a system no matter what a big power it practices.However, theomitted“agency”of thisactionof thissystematickilling isstillunderstood. It’snone other than the imperialists. So, this choice of transitivity processes is an opportunelinguistic choice of his identifying hanging as a killing and the imperialists as the impliedkillers.Inthestory,theimperialistsrepresentallauthorityandpower.Thispowerisrepresentedintransitivityframeworkbytheauthor’schoicesofimperativeandquestionstructureslike:Killhimquickly,getitover,stopthatabominablenoise,orquestionlike:Wholetthatbloodybruteinhere?The interpersonal relationship between the prisoners and the imperialist authoritywas like the one between the “unchallenging powerful” and the “helplessly powerless”.According to Halliday & Matthiessen (2013), an imperative mood structure is employed tofunctionashavingsomeonelesspowerfultogetservice.And,aninterrogativesentenceenactsto demand service or information. So, the natives like the hanged are not in the position ofdemanding service; they have been made into slave like “service givers” who eventuallyacceptsdeathpenaltyasanunresisting fate,which causesan internaldiscomfort inOrwell’smindthatonlyacceptsfreewill,equityandjustice.The choices of material processes and actors in the transitivity system again have beendeterminantinthestory’spointofview.Theactors‘We’and‘I’constructthe1stpersonpointofview in the story. The narrator is a character in the story who narrates the storywith hisindividual psychological consciousness on the topic of hanging taken place at the jail yardbeforehis eyes.Therefore,wecould say that theactors ‘I’ and ‘We’ construct the1stpersonpointofviewbasedontheFowler’s(1996,1986)“spatial-psychologicalmodel”.Thenarratorhimself is least engaged in theactionsbut ismostly tellingand reporting theentirehanging



incident. Again, he narrates mostly, as stated by Simpson (2004), in indirect “NarrativeReportingSpeeches”(NRS).So,here,itisclearthattounderstandthestory,thereadersmainlyaccesstowhatdegreethenarratorseesandtells,notthecharacter’swords.However,Orwellexploitedsomedirectspeechesaswellwhichhavebroughtakindoflivenessofthenarrationofthestory.Linguistically,Orwellexploits“inclusivewe”whichexpresseshisstanceaboutthehanging and thewhole event as if Orwell is a part ofwhat just happened. Nevertheless, heexclusively disassociates himself with the system of hanging by saying in the 1st personsingular “It is curious, but till thatmoment I had never realizedwhat itmeans to destroyahealthy,consciousman”,Orwell(1931).The material processes are very representative of “inhuman action” and activities and alsoveryinstrumentalinthetransitivitysystemtointerpretthethemeof“wrongness”ofthetext.Theimperialistswere“hurrying”tokilltheman.Thishurriednesstofinishahumanlifemaybeprofessionallyrightandappropriate,but“morally”inappropriate.Orwellthinksofthishurriedarrangement of killing a healthyman iswrong while his life wants to live and linger. Thisethical and logical position of Orwell goes matched with the modern attitude to capitalpunishment as inmany countries it has been abolished from the same perspective and lifesentenceisadvocatedasthesubstitutewhichletsabigoptionforalifetoliveaslongasitdoeswith an infliction of long term punishment and eventual prospects of repentance andcorrection. Orwell’s choices in transitivity in the story reflect that hurriedness. Materialprocesses like ‘waiting’ for hanging, ‘marching’ quick for hanging, ‘striking’ of the clock forhanging, ‘killing’ quickly, ‘getting’ the hangingover quickly etc. herald that therewas amadrushforkillingaman,which,Orwellovertlysays,isverymuchinhumanandmorallywrong.Again,theprocessesof‘having’drinkandeverywarder’s‘receiving’breakfastafterthehanginghave been ascribed to human actors including the natives and the English. It creates animpressionthatthedeathofamanhardlymatterstothem.Theincidentimpliesthattheweak,colonized natives’ being routinely killed under the British imperialists’ traditional cruelsystemsof capital punishment has created an “usuality”which no longer bothers the nativefellowprisonersseeingsomeoftheircohortsbeingexecutedbeforetheireyes,evenwiththenatives’assistinglabor.Theimperialistsdon’tshowtheyareaffected,andtheydon’treallyfeelaffectedbyanotherhuman’skillingintheirhandsbecausetheircrueltyisademonstrationandapplicationof power, and thus theymake it aworking success of creating a “fearfulmilieu”which has probably replaced the natives’ compassion. As a consequence, both the Englishjailorsandthenativesgoandshowunaffectedbytakingpartsooninthedailyfurtherphysicalactions of “taking” breakfast and “having” drinks immediately after the event of the Hinduman’shangingasausualevent.This“welcomedfate”ofthenativesisepitomizedinthetypicalexploiting, powerful and fearful characteristic of colonialism which has got surprisinglyexpressedinanimperialistwriterlikeOrwell.Therearesomematerialprocesseswithnon-humanactors.Majorityofthemareattributedtothedogas theactor.Theprocesses like ‘barking’and ‘leaping’of thedog, ‘making’adash fortheprisoner, ‘tryingtolick’theprisoner’sface, ‘echoing’theyaps, ‘galloping’nearthegallowsafterthehanging,‘retreating’intoacorneroftheyard–allinsinuatethatthephysicalactionsofthedoginfluencethewholeofthehangingeventanditwasabletodelaythehangingforsometimebyitsseveralphysicalactionswhichmaybeinspiredbytheinnerfeelingsthataroseinitatthesightofahuman’skilling.Thedogwasapparentlymovedbythehangingwhiletheman’sfellows seemed absolutely unaffected by it. The dog’s strong, tensed physical activitiesevidenceananimal’sdisapproval andcriticismofhuman’sexecutionwhichOrwellobservedvery closely, and which he was curiously brooding over inside. The dog’s restless physical



505

movemayagainbeinterpretedasanaturalanimalprotestagainstunbearable,uncomfortableimperialismwhilenohumanislefttoprotestitbaldly.As some meronymic actors (Simpson, 2004, p. 76), Orwell has attributed some materialprocesses to thehumanpartsof theman tobehanged like: “alltheorgansofhisbody(nails,stomach, skin,muscles etc.)wereworking”. These non-humanmeronymic actors substitute acompletehumanbeingwhoisstillintheroleofa‘doer’.Thatis,the–going-to-be-hangedmanisstillasphysicallyableasothers,andOrwell’sthoughtfulreasoningisjustinthere–howfarforcefully destroying an able bodied healthy human being is appropriate as a punishment?Instead,lifesentenceinprisonwouldbemoresuitablepunishmentsystem.The narrator individually involves only in one action: “I let go of the dog“. This scarceavailabilityofOrwell’s involvement in theseen,materialactionsdirectedtohangingpurposeconnectstohisideologicallymotivatedavoidanceofefforted,activeparticipationintheeventof the capital punishment. Positively, his action advantageously affects the sympathetic,concerned dog- its freedom. Orwell’s action of “freeing” the dog signifies that he was notagainst the freewill of a dog, even an animal. He was also, to more extent, an advocate offreedom of the oppressed whose freedom has been crushed into non-existence under thestrongbootof crueltyand lackinghumanityof the longstaying imperialisticpresence in thegripped, controlled, colonized lands as in Burma. However, inclusively, the narratoraccompaniedbyotherdoerstakespartinmore13actions–werewaiting, proceed,setout,hadgone,putmyhandkerchief,walked,entered,stoodwaiting,hooded,went,walked,hadadrink,andwent.Oftheseprocesses,only3aregoaldirected(drink,handkerchief,theman)andtheprisoneristhegoalonlyonceinoneprocess.Thismeansthattheactionscarriedoutbytheactorswiththewriter’sreluctant,observatoryandpartlyinvolvementdidnotintentlyaffecttheprisoner,anddidn’tmeananycausedharmtohim.Thenarratorwasjustpassivelyinvolved with the proceeding of hanging, avoiding any enthusiastic, effectual big actions,which may be otherwise translated as his ideological, thoughtful disapproval of capitalpunishment. Hewasmore in observation to carefully decipher the central and associatedwrongnessinthesystemofcapitalpunishment.Theactor‘oneofus’andtheprocess,‘wouldbegone’,isaverysignificanttransitivitychoicewhichcharacterizesthenarratorasasympatheticman.“Oneofus”isananaphoricreferenceto the prisoner decidedly to be hanged after moments. The plural referencing word “us”refers tohumanitytowhich thenarrators, thehanged, thewholecolonized, thecolonizers-all belong to. Orwell’s deliberate choice of such type of language intends his powerfulhumanistic sense of “solidarity, “equity feeling” and decisively looks upon the prisoner as“ourman”despitehis(Orwell’s)beingadistantrepresentativeofthepowerful,authoritativeBritish colonizers. This “we feeling” of Orwell is an appealing, cosmopolitan broadness ofsublime, liberal integration of humanitywhere cruel, short sighted, ignoring practices likecapitalpunishmentsoundsfar-fetchedandunconvincing.Circumstantial adjuncts involved in thematerialprocess clauses like ‘quiteamicably’, ‘withaknowingsmile’,‘inatolerantway’ imbuethehangingeventwithasharedmeaningthatkillingof a man consciously does not trouble the killers’ normality, and they countenance thehappeningofthehangingasacutanddriedpatternofpunishment.Relationalprocesses:Thereare23relationalprocessesin‘AHanging’whichis37.49%ofthetotal.Elevencareershave involved in the processes. Of them, human careers involve in 10 relational process



clauses,andnon-humancareersinvolvein13relationalprocessclauses.Thecareerusedmostfrequentlyis‘it’andthesecondmostfrequentcareeris‘He’(thehangedman).As explained in the theory of transitivity, relational processes pinpoint the attributes andidentitiesofentities,therelationalprocessesemployedinthestoryillustratethetruefeaturesofpersons,place,situationetc.prevailingduringtheexecutionevent.Theattributesintherelationalprocessclausesprovideanimageoftheprisonerasisworthnoconsiderationorvalueandhissituationhasturnedverypathetic,andhe issomuchworriedandnervousattheprospectofthelossofhislife.Inthetransitivityframework,thechoiceofpronominalcareer(it)hasplayedavitalroleinreferencingentitiesbackandforward,whichhas, in Lamberchat’s (1994) language, discourse referents. So, this non-human career is ofgoodusetoattributeaperfectimageofnonhumanentities;itinvitesthereadersforabetterunderstanding of the non-human entities exiting and identified in the story such as theenvironmentof theprisoners’ livingplace, the timeofhanging, situationetc.mentionedandinformedasthediscoursereferents.Maximumrelationalprocesses exploited are ‘verb to be’whichwell identifies and describessad time, bad place, persons etc. The choice of the attributes is also of very mastery typebecause these attributes have a surface level of adjectival signification in addition to theirsuggested,deepermeaningoffrustration,factofdeprivationandoppressionandsoforth.Themorning was sodden, symbolizing an unfortunate or ominous morning for an ill-fated manwhose life isup for the forced termination.Theprisoncellwasbare, symbolizingprisoners’deprivationofthemostbasichumanprotectionarrangement,whichsignifiesOrwell’sinsightintothedeplorableconditionoftheprisonersintheimperialists’jails.Theprisonerwaspuny,symbolizing thenatives’helplessness, andweaknessof the colonized in the faceof thegiantimperialists’dominatingpowerandauthority.Theprisonerwassupposedtobehangedbythattime,symbolizingtheman’stimewasbeingcounted.Thisisotherwisereadinessforagroupofmentotakeanotherman’slifebeforehisfellowswhosharethecorresponding,incapacitatedhelplessnessinflictedbytheimperialistsinBurma.Other attributes are also purposeful choices for making combined meaning of specificwrongnessinhangingorcapitalpunishment.Forexample,thehangingwascurioustoOrwell.So, the choice of attributes in this pattern of transitivity portrays an inexplicableinquisitiveness and interest to comprehend any practical, sensible importance of capitalpunishmentatall,andhewassearchingthemeaningofkillingahealthymanforcefullywhilehe/shedesirestocontinuetolive.Thelifeofthemantobehangedisinfulltide;so,hanging,Orwellfeels,isanerroneousmethodasitstopsthelifebeforeitsutmostextent.Thecryoftheprisonerwashighandreiteratedwhichsymbolizeshistensedmentalconditionwhichhewassolitarilygoingthrough.Anotherdistinctexampleofattribute is found intheclauseof “Thedead bodywas ahundredyardsaway” whence all otherswere locked in joys and funs, andlaughter.Keepingadeadbodyyardsapart,theothers,whojusthadwitnessedtheman’sbeinghanged to death, characteristically resumed their regular engagement as normal andunaffected regular humans as if just nothing grave, shocking, poignant happened. Thus, theHallidianrelationaltransitivitypatternisskillfullyemployedbyOrwelltohighlightthethemeofwrongness in the storyreflected in time,place,personsand their aggregateofobservablebehaviorduring,afterandbeforetheexperienceofhangingoftheHinduman.MentalprocessesMentalprocessclausesareonly16innumber.Itaddsupto26.08%.However,theyareverysignificant to present a sensory look into the inner sights of the sensers (characters). As



507

explained that mental processes in the transitivity bring characters’ inside out, the mentalprocessesinthestoryserveastheemotionalguidetotheinterioron-goingsofthehangedmanandtheothersinvolvedintheexecution.Inthementalprocesses,thesensorsarebasicallythehangedmanandthenarrator,Orwell-oneiskilledandtheotherismovedbythescenesofthekilling. In the transitivity framework, the mental processes define that other characters’absence in the mental processes makes a reference that they are mentally indifferent orpassivetothehangingandthehangedman.Thenarrator,Orwell is thedominantparticipant in thementalprocesses,which implies thatthenarrator is in the strongerroleof theeffectual andactive senserof thephenomenon i.e.hanging taken place in frontof him.That is, almost onlyOrwell ismentally deciphering thefrightening,catastrophicconditionof theoppressedcommunitymanifestanddocumented inthesystematicsilencingbyhangingandjailingandsoon.Thisself-realizationofOrwellasanimperialistofficersuggestsan“anti-imperialist”thoughtinoneheadwithinthewholeBritishimperialists’roadtoIndia.Whileotherexecutingimperialistrepresentativesgouncaringandunaffected,onlythenarratorshowshisinternalengagementinperceivingthecruelandidioticpunishmentsystemthatkillsthepoorHinduman.Thus,transitivityhasplayedavitalroleinperceptual representation of the narrator’smindset and purposefulwriting agendawithhisobviousnegativeperspectiveonhangingasaformofcapitalpunishment.Thesingular-pluralpairsof theparticipants in thementalprocesses likethesensersof ‘I’&‘We’,and‘He’&‘We’providethereadersanimpressionthatnobodyiswithoutfeelings;weallhaveourfeelings.However,differentpeoplemayfeelanidenticalthingindifferentways.Noteveryone’sfeelingsruninthesamedirectionwithsamecategoryofperspective.OnemightfeellaughingatwhatImayfeellikecryingtolook.Similarthinghappensinthestory“AHanging.‘One felt an impulse to sing’ is, for example, just opposite to common, sensible, expectedhumanbehaviorjustinaplacesoonbefore,during,andafterthehangingofahumanbeing.The Mental Processes are mainly seeing, looking, watching, glancing, hearing, feeling andunderstanding. The acts of all four human senses have been employed except the sense ofeatingbecausehangingisnotathingtoeat.Theuseoffouroutoffivehumansensescreatesadeepmentalpictureof thecharacterswithactivesensestoreceive informationaboutwhat’sgoingoninthehangingspot.Thesensersespeciallythenarratorisawareofeverythingwhichis goingonaround them,butnobody is able to instigateanactionnecessarily to stop it, actadequatelytothinkoutanydisobedience,reluctancetoanddisapprovalofcapitalpunishment.It is very skillful thatOrwellhasattributed thementalprocesses tohimself (I), theprisoner(he), ourselves (we) to give an indication of what the characters feel, think or perceive“individually” and “collectively” as to thehangingof aman. It alsodepicts thegoodandbadpeople. Through the mental transitivity it gets manifest that nobody except the narrator isparticularly affected and provoked to let out his reaction to the annoying system of capitalpunishment.The processes i.e. seeing, looking, watching, glancing, are quite synonymous. Likewise,listeningandhearingarealsosynonymous. Itsuggestsonekindofrepetition.Thisrepetitionbrings a foregrounded mental effect to the text. Again, the repetition of the mental act of‘seeing’10timesinitsdifferentsynonymsindicatesthatthesensersmainlyputanobservatoryflash of insight into the ‘unspoken wrongness’ of capital punishment. It’s almost like onlyseeingandseeingawrong,inhumanacthappenandthereisabsolutelynobodytospeakofit.Itis, therefore, ‘unspoken wrongness’. Surprisingly, this unspoken wrongness gets spoken inOrwell’sessay,“AHanging”.



Verbalprocesses11verbalprocessesinthestoryconstitute17.93%ofthetotal.Therearesome“verbiages”ofwhichthe“sayers”areomittedbuttheyarestillunderstoodbythepreviousandsubsequentturn taking. The sentence structures of these processes are of one of Lambercht’s (1996)major threetypes,which is easily identifiableandproductiveaswell.Thesestructurescanexpress, as Lambercht says, the speechact differences like interrogative versus imperativeversusdeclarative.Thenativeshavetakentheroleofsayersbuttheirverbiagesaremainlydeclarativesentencesandrepliesoftypicalsubordinates.Verbalprocessesincludesaid,bubbled,shout,exclaimed.Theverbalprocesspairlike‘bubbled– shouted’ make a kind of binary opposition that signifies a binary opposite relationshipbetweentheoppressed(theBurmese)andtheoppressors(theimperialists).Thesayersandreceivershaveaboss-subordinaterelationshipwhichisrealizedbytheverbiagesconsistingofafewaddressingwordsofthenativesi.e.“sir’’“yessir”etc.,andafew‘imperatives’oftheimperialistsi.e.“Hurryup”,“Chalo’”etc.Again,theverbiageofthesuperintendent,whichisanangryquestion ‘Wholetthatbloodybruteinhere?’-points tothepowerandauthorityoftheimperialistsexpressedthroughtheirdetermininglanguage.Furthermore,verbiageslike‘ForGod’s shake, ‘hurry up’, Chalo’ etc. have a manifestation of the state and situation of theimperialistauthority.Theybecamefidgetytokillaman.Interestingly,thenarratordoesnottakepartin theconversationbecausehepaysgreatconcerntothehangingasasystem.Hedoesnotsayanything.Heonlyperceives.Again, theprocesses like ‘shouted’ implythat thesuperintendentwaskindofangryattheslothfulnessofhissubordinates.Even,theverbiage“you had better all come out and have a drink” reflects the sayer’s (the superintendent)inhumaninvitationorsuggestionthatdoesnotfitjustafterthekillingofaman.The circumstances across the verbal processes also perform a valuable role to convey theinhuman sayings. ‘Quite genially, fiercely, terribly, angrily – have a reflection of the sayers’manner of speaking before and after the hanging. This harsh, burdensome and painfulbehaviorassociateswiththeimperialists’statusandtheircommonplacepatternsofattitudeto the oppressed colonized,whichOrwell’s humanisticmind hinderswithin and arouses adebatewhetherthis is inconformitywiththe20thcenturyspiritof collectivelybenevolent,equalworld.Behavioralprocesses:Althoughonly3innumberandonly4.89%ofthetotal,choicesofbehavioralprocessesin‘AHanging’ are very significant in semantic representation of ‘wrongness’ in the behaviortowardskillingandthekilledman.Inallthreeclauses,thesameprocess‘laughing’hasbeenrepeated. This repetition is a strong reference to a foregrounded moral decay of theparticipants.Tarrayo ((2014) says linguistics (stylistics) unlocks a literary text. More specifically,behavioral processes unlock participant’s psychological behavioral representation, indeed.AstheparticipantsareconsciousbeingsandasOrwellhimselfisinvolvedintheprocess,hehaskeptthenumberoftheseprocesseslimitedsoastocovereverybody’smental‘sickness’tosomedegree.Thisismorallywrong‘toburstoutlaughing’aftertakingone’slife.The participants or ‘behavers’ are arranged very technically and inclusively - ‘I’, ‘severalpeople’andthen‘everyone’.Itmovesfromspecifictogeneral.Thisinclusiveparticipationintheprocessofawrongbehaviorof ‘laughing’afterkillingamancarriesagoodvalue in theconstruction of the theme of ‘unspokenwrongness’ in ‘A Hanging’ from specific to genericlevel.



509

The mood adjunct i.e. ‘quite loudly’ (manner) signals to the readers that nobody is at allaffectedbythishanging.Anothernoteworthythingisthatthewritercitesallthebehavioralprocesses almost in the closing paragraphs of the story, which signifies that the hangingendedupwithfunasifhangingamanequalsameretrifle.Itiskindofreliefforthemaswell.Existentialprocesses:In the story ‘A Hanging’, Orwell describesmainlywhat happened, bywhom, and how, notshowstheexistenceofanyentity.So,Orwell’schoicesofexistentialprocessesaretooscanty.Thereisonlyoneexistentialprocessinthestory.Itconstitutes1.63%.

CONCLUSION:Halliday’s (1985)Transitivity framework is a part of his systemic –functional grammar. Itlabels the language functions as the representation patterns of human experience as theideationalmeaning. Ideationalmeaning, indeed, representswhat is going on in theworld.Thisresearchthusdecidedtocarryoutaninterdisciplinarystudyoflinguisticsandliteratureto explore Orwell’s perceived and experienced ideational meaning of the concern of thewrongness in the imperialists’ injuring, uncompensating and oppressing systems imposedover the far lands’ races,which all,with a continued historical and literary significance, isdocumented anddepicted inhis experientiallywritten, superbly illustrating short story “AHanging”.Inthetransitivitychoices,itisfoundthatOrwellmakesalonglistof“physicalactions”oftheinvolved characters and assigned imperialist police members. These actions represent“executionarrangement”ofphysical activities to“destroy”ahealthyphysiquewhich is inahelpless position. Orwell is the narrator of the story. He partakes the execution of theBurmeseHinduman,butheonlystandsapartandcloselyobservesthehanging.Heescapesfrom the required physical activities and labor because he had a reluctance and apathytowardshangingasa formof capitalpunishmentbecausehismorally influentialbelief andstancerejectedanddisapprovedpunishinghumancapitally.OutsideOrwellisanimperialistpolice,butathearthehasaqualmaboutwhetherornotheisoneoftheimperialists.Hislessphysicalinactionhasfacilitatedhisstronger,deeperobservationoftheexecution.Orwell’srealizationcametobethatitisreallysoeasytoinflicttortureontheweaker-man,woman,known,unknown.TheHindumantobehangedafterawhileisoneofthepowerless,colonized man with no prospects of back fight with the British imperialists. He incisivelyunderstandsverywellnoneofhiseffortswillbearanyeffectsenoughtosavehimself fromthecolonizers’ cruelty, embarrassment, andabuse.Therefore,he is aboundreceiverof theloss of his own life. In the material transitivity system, the to-be hanged man is fully ormeronymicallythegoalsof12outof25goalorientedmaterialclauses,whichsuggestsheisthemostaffectedpersoninthenarrativebytheactionsofthefellowsandtheimperialists.It’s really painful to see and set brothers to kill brothers. Nevertheless, this unbecoming,gruesome, andcruelsightandphilosophyof theoccupyingBritishpower in the far landofBurma, India and elsewhere was nakedly exposed. In the narration of the event of thehanging,it’s thehangedman’s“fellowprisoners”and“warders”,whoseidenticalbirthland,culture, religion, race made and shaped their “community sense”, are engaged to make ahabit of executing hanging their fellows. Thus, they unknowingly over time turned into“habitualslaves”of theimperialists,andtheyworkperfectlyontheinjected inhumanspiritintothembythosegiantinvaders.



ThereisanunderlyingmeaningpotentialofOrwell’sdislikeanddisapprovalofimperialisticoppressionand their rulesandrulingsystemswhichareon thewholeaccountamismatchnot only in the different land, but it ismore importantly anti-human, anti-equity game ofpoweroverthepowerlesswhomthedeprivationofeducation,economy,knowledge,sciencehaveputtheminwaybackwardinhumancivilizations’developmentrace.Actually,Orwell’sstrong “anti-imperialist” thought and realization is caught obvious in the choice of hismaterialtransitivitywhichhetakespartintheverylimitednumberi.e.onlytwo.A kindof “genericdisapproval”of capitalpunishment comesup through the languageuse.The choiceofpassive constructionof some transitivity clauseswhich are basically “action-oriented”andwhichomit theagencyof theactionsemphasizethewrongactionofhanginghumans to death irrespective of the actors/ agency of the actions. This also suggests thatirrespectiveof the factOrwell belongs toor doesn’t belong to the imperialists,he just as ahumanbeingstandsaloneagainsthanging,thecruelhumankillinginotherhumans’hands.Ahigh-lowdistinction,anoppressor-oppressedrole,aruler-ruledcharacter,amaster-slaverelationship, which is a frustrating picture of anti-equity relationship potential amongsthumanity,alsocomesinlightthroughthelinguisticchoicesmadeacrossthestory.Thechoiceofimperativemoodstructuressuchas“killhimquickly’,“getitover”,“stopthatabominablenoise”andinterrogativemoodalongsidesuchas“wholetthatbloodybruteinhere?”makesitobviousthattheimperialistsandthenativesaredifferent.Thesedifferencesareletoutinlanguage, in behavior, in messages and actions. The imperialists’ language goes aroundmaking a meaning that they are in the position of “demanding and deciding” and thecolonizedretchedarejustinoppositepositionofthe“servicegivers,andorderobeying”.Thisputsthedividedsectionsofhumansofsamebloodasintwodistinctidentitiesof“they”and“we”.Orwell’santi-imperialistpersonalityandmindsetismanifestinthechoiceofsingular-pluralnumber of 1st person referencingwords such as “we” and “I” realized as the actors in thetransitivityclauses.Whenheisoneintheinclusive“we”,heishonestinidentifyinghisrealoutward belongingness to the imperialists, but elsewhere when he uses “I”, it singles outhimself inward as none of the imperialists. So, the transitivity framework thus brings upOrwellasan“oddout”.Therefore, itisonlyOrwell’sownthoughtandquestion-what isthepoint destroying a healthy human being by hanging? , which doesn’t arise in the otherimperialists he teams upwith professionally. Precisely,what is right in other imperialists’eyesiswronginOrwell’s.Allthepeopleoncebelievedthatthesunmovesroundthesunwasprovedwrong.OnlyGalileobelievedtheopposite-theearthmovesroundthesunandhewasproved right. So, Orwell’s pinpointing wrongness in imperialism is a kind of “Galileolicdiscovery”.And,onceasophisticatedsoulfindsthetruth,he/shecan’tstayanylongerwithfalsehoodorsomethingwrongandflawed.Practically,Orwellwasnotconfortablewithsuchawrong,oppressivehumanrulingofhisownnation, sohe lefthispolicing job eventually,andwentbacktoEnglandfromBurma,whichrepresentsOrwell’s“No”toimperialism.Materialprocesses,whicharephysicalactions,areveryrepresentativeof“inhumanactions”especiallyhanging.Something“inhuman”issomethingunacceptable.Thematerialprocessof“hurrying” signifies that the executionerswereall trying to “get ridof ahuman life”.TheywereonamadrushtofinishthelessvaluablelifeoftheHinduprisoner.Theraceofhumansthatrushestowardthekillingof anotherhuman lagsbehindby thousandsteps in termsofhumanity. Orwell does not belong to those with backwardness in humanity. So, Orwell’sevaluationofhanging as an inhuman action and themannerof the responsible imperialist



511

officials as unacceptable is a “cosmopolitan forwardness” with the modern disapprovingattitudetowardshangingasaninhumancapitalpunishment.Wrongmannerofthepeople-boththeimperialistsandthenativeprisoners-gotobviousalsointheirimmediateresumptionofmaterialactionssuchas“eating”and“drinking”.Mandies,whichisnatural.But,killingamansystematicallyisanti-natureandanti-human.Afterdoingthis anti-human, cruel jobofkillingaman, if thekillersdon’t feel an impulseof tears fromeyes,andaguiltyburdeninhearts,itsuggestsa“droughtoffeelings”inkindhumanhearts.The drought on earth can be healed by rain from the huge, generous sky. Similarly, thedraughtinhumanheartscanberemovedbybig,generous,thoughtfulmindsandheartsthatcanmake thehalfdeadalivethrough therelentlessstrokesofadvice, argument,questions,criticism of the derailed, turned-inhuman hearts and their activities and systems. In thisconnection,Orwellasawriterisanamazing“changemaker”whogaveoutaclearmessageofhisanti-imperialistandanti-capitalpunishmentstancebybreakingawaywithitsworkforceinBurma.Theprocessesnamely“havingdrink”and“receivingbreakfast”justmomentsafterthehangingconnotethattheimperialistscreateda“fearfulmilieu”whereinhangingandanyother formsofcrueltybecame“usuality”,andtheoppressedcolonizedBurmesebecamethe“helplessfatereceivers”.Themoodadjunctsinthematerialclausessuchas“quiteamicably”,“with a knowing smile”, “in a tolerant way” also solidify the meaning of “unaffectednormality” of the executioners and the “cut and dried” pattern of capital punishment. ThepoorHindu’shanging is anapparent“physicaldeath”ofanindividual,buthiswardersandthe imperialists are also “dead athearts”, atwhich thedogeven is shockedandsurprised.The dog’s material actions like “leaping”, “barking”, “echoing “ the yaps, “licking” theprisoner’s face etc. were able to delay the hanging event. This little animal couldn’t stophanging finally though; its behavior implies that an animal ismoved by the prospect of acruel killingof amanwhile the fellowhumansgounaffected. It suggests that imperialisticcrueltystartedoutloweringhumanswaydownthananimals.Orwell finds happiness in “freedom”. In amaterial clause, he is the actor of the action of“freeing”thedog.Bythisactionhesuggests“thefreedomofall”thosewhomtheimperialistsconsidernosuperiortoananimal.Thus,throughthechoicesofactorsinthematerialclausessuch as “one of us” reflects Orwell’s “we feeling” meaning an appealing, cosmopolitanbroadnessofsublime,liberalintegrationofhumanity–inclusiveofthenarrator,thehanged,the whole colonized, the colonizers - where cruel, short sighted, ignoring practices likecapitalpunishmentsoundsfar-fetchedandunconvincing.The descriptions through the relational processes come up overtly to depict the ”wrongattributes and identities” of both human and non-human carriers across the clauses. Themorningoftheeventwas“sodden”andtheprisonerwas“puny”.Thesoddenmorningisnotonlysoddenforthehangedman,butitalsosignifiesthe“timeofmisfortune”oftheBurmeseimposedbytheBritishcolonizingrace.Theattributei.e.“puny”symbolizesindeepersensethe “powerlessness” of the natives. Orwell identifies imperialism as the token of“misfortune” for the “powerless” races in the captured far landswhere, prisoning,hangingetc.werea“traditionalinhumantool”toterrifyandsubduetheharmlesspeoplewhocaninnocapacityfightbackthegiant,Britishimperialpower.Mentalprocessessummarizethatonlytwopersonsas thesensersare involvedmentally intheeventofhanging-thenarrator,Orwellandthehangedman.Oneisimperialistofficerandtheotherisacolonizedmantobehanged.Thehangedmanburns,andthenarratorgetshurtattheburnt.Orwellasthewitnessandnarratoroftheeventisthepredominant“senser”ofthementalprocesses,which suggests thathe isheavily engaged indecipheringhow cheap



thelifeofthecolonizedtothepowerfulis.Colonialismliterallycannotofferagoodlifetothecolonized but they take their lives so neglectfully and carelessly. So, Orwell was doublechecking very sincerely to keep himself aloof from this big “mismatched human systemofoppression”.He calls it “unspokenwrongness” because his companions and also the otherprisonerswereonly“seeing”and“seeing”(10timesinthementalclauses)withoutspeakinguptodisapprove it.Thewrongdoersand thosewhoputupwithareequallycondemnable.Thus, “AHanging”servesas thedocumentofOrwell’s intolerance toanddisapprovalof allkinds of wrongness in colonialism and capital punishment, which makes him a “bird ofhumanity”withdifferentfeatherthatdidnotchoosetoflocktogetherwiththewrongdoersoftheBritishimperialists.“Freedomofspeech”ofthecolonizediskilledalongsideotheroppressions.Mangetsvoicetospeak fromGod.To stop thisvoice to speak up and tonot allow them tohave their say ismorallyandreligiouslywrong.Theverbalprocessessuchas(thehanged)“bubbled”and(theofficer)“shouted”signifythattheimperialistssuppressedthevoiceofthecolonizedpeople.The hangedmanwants to express his points and pain but he cannot pull themout of hismouthanditremainsunheardwhileallspokenisthesolerightoftheoccupyingBritishers.So,theeventofhangingadditionallymakesclearofthe“death”ofthefreedomofspeechwiththe death of a human body. This large scale wrongness makes Orwell an impossiblesupporterofimperialists’occupationandoppressions.Behaviouralprocessespoint to“genericmoraldecay”ofhumans.Theprocessof“laughing”repeatedlyafterhangingamanmanifestsaseriousimmoralbehavioralissueandapointed“sickness”ofhumanmindandmanner.Thechoiceofreferencingwordssuchas“I”,“people”and “everyone” signals that none is safe from this hollowness of sympathy inminds. Thisbehavioralissuealsosuggeststhateveryonetookpartinthekillingofaman,theyexecutedhimand it affectednoneof them,which represents “inhumanbehavior”of the imperialistswhich has also been injected into the hanged man’s fellows. Orwell thus identifies“colonialism” as a negative “metamorphosing” power that change kind hearts into hollow,insensitiveones,whichhedocuments in the story “AHanging”ofwhichhe is thewitness,narrator,andwriter.ReferencesAlam,M.S.(2020)

Alam,M.S.(2006).Orwell's"ShootinganElephant":ReflectionsonImperialismandNeoimperialism.IIUCStudies,3,55-62.

Ballenger,B.P.,Han,J.J.,Bagley,M.,&Fuquay,M.E.(2005).Thecuriouswriter.PearsonLongman.

Barkan,S.E.,&Bryjak,G.J.(2011).Fundamentalsofcriminaljustice:Asociologicalview.Jones&BartlettPublishers.

Bloor,M.,&Bloor,T.(2013).Thepracticeofcriticaldiscourseanalysis:Anintroduction.Routledge.

Burke,M.(Ed.).(2017).TheRoutledgehandbookofstylistics.Routledge.

Carter,R.,&Stockwell,P.(2008).TheLanguageandLiteratureReader.London:Routledge.

Chandler,D.(1976).CapitalPunishment.InCapitalPunishmentinCanada(pp.13-36).McGill-Queen'sUniversityPress.

Clark,R.(2009).CapitalPunishmentinBritain.IanAllan.

Cunanan,B.T.(2011).UsingtransitivityasaframeworkinastylisticanalysisofVirginiaWoolf’sOldMrs.Grey.AsianEFLJournalProfessionalTeachingArticles,vol.54

Donmez,B.A.(2012).TheVoiceoftheimperialinanAnti-ImperialistTone:GeorgeOrwell’sBurmeseDays.

비교문화연구,28,5-16.



513

Eggins,S.(2004).Introductiontosystemicfunctionallinguistics.A&CBlack.

E.HiltonHubbard(1999).Love,warandlexicogrammar:TransivityandcharacterizationintheMoor’sLastSigh.JournalofLiteraryStudies,15(3-4),355-376,doi:10.1080/02564719908530236.

Ezzina,R.(2015).TransitivityAnalysisofTheCryingofLot49byThomasPynchon.InternationalJournalofHumanitiesandCulturalStudies.2(3)

Ferrara,P.(2013).GlobalReligionsandinternationalrelations:adiplomaticperspective.

Fontaine,L.,Bartlett,T.,&O'Grady,G.(Eds.).(2013).Systemicfunctionallinguistics:Exploringchoice.CambridgeUniversityPress.

Fowler,R.(1996)[1986]LinguisticCriticism,(2ndEdition),Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress

Fuller,D.J.(2019).ADiscourseAnalysisofHabakkuk.Brill.

Gilroy,P.(2005).Postcolonialmelancholia.ColumbiaUniversityPress.

Hadden,B.,&Luce,H.R.,(1983).Time,Volume122,Issues20-27.TimeIncorporated.

Halliday,M.A.K.(1970).Languagestructureandlanguagefunction.InLyons,J.(Ed.)Newhorizonsinlinguistics.Harmondsworth:Penguin.

Halliday,M.A.K.(1971).Linguisticfunctionandliterarystyle:AninquiryintothelanguageofWilliamGolding’stheinheritors.InS.Chatman(Ed.),Literarystyle:Asymposium(pp.330-368).London:OxfordUniversityPress.

Halliday,M.A..K(1981).Typesofstructure.ReadingsinSystemicLinguistics.London:Batsford,29-41.

Halliday,M.A.K.(1985).Anintroductiontofunctionalgrammar.London:EdwardArnold.

Halliday,M.A.K.,&Matthiessen,C.M.(2013).Halliday'sintroductiontofunctionalgrammar.Routledge.

Jellinek,R.(1972).HowEricBlairbecameGeorgeOrwell.NewYorkTimes.November12,1972,SectionBR,Page7.

Johnston,J.andBailey,H.(1906).ThelifeofA.D.Brown.[Placeofpublicationnotidentified]:BooksforBusiness.

Lambercht,K.(1994).InformationStructureandSentenceForm:Topic,Focus,andtheMentalRepresentationsofDiscourseReferents.CambridgeUniversityPress

Leech,G.N.&Short,M.(2007).StyleinFiction:ALinguisticIntroductiontoEnglishFictionalprose.Edinburgh:PearsonLongman.

Lemmens,M.(1998).Lexicalperspectivesontransitivityandergativity:causativeconstructionsinEnglish(Vol.166).JohnBenjaminsPublishing.

Martin,J.(1992).Englishtext:Systemandstructure.Amsterdam:Benjamins

McKenzie,P.(1982).GeorgeOrwell,'Seeing'and'Saying':AReplytoFrancisDunlop.JournalofPhilosophyofEducation,16(2),255-64.

Mehmood,A.,Amber,R.,Ameer,S.&Faiz,R.(2014).Transitivityanalysis:RepresentationofloveinWilde’sTheNightingaleandTheRose.EuropeanJournalofResearchinSocialSciences.2(4),ISSN2053-5429.

Melia,P.(2015).ImperialOrwell/Orwellimperial.Atlantis,37(2),11-25.

MEYERS,J.(2010).INTRODUCTION.InOrwell:LifeandArt(pp.Ix-Xii).UniversityofIllinoisPress.

Nababan,M.(2010).IronyInAHangingEssayWrittenedByGeorgeOrwell(AllusiontotheCrucifixionofJesusChrist).JurnalNuances,1(01).

Nguyen,H.T.(2012).Transitivityanalysisof“HeroicMother”byHoaPham.InternationalJournalofEnglishLinguistics,2(4).Doi:10.5539/ijel.v2n4p85.

Nodoushan,M.A.S(2014).InternationalJournalofLanguageStudies(IJLS)–volume7(1).Lulu.com.

Ohio.GeneralAssembly.HouseofRepresentatives,DurbinWar(1853).LegislativeReportontheSubjectofCapitalPunishment,MadeintheHouseofRepresentativesofOhio:March9,1853.HarvardUniversity.

Orwell,G.(1931).Ahanging(pp.44-8).Adelphi.

Orwell,G.,&Weis,R.(2015).GeorgeOrwell:Atimelessvoice.InFurlongG.(Author),TreasuresfromUCL(pp.182-185).London

Rai,A.(1990).Orwellandthepoliticsofdespair:acriticalstudyofthewritingsofGeorgeOrwell.CUPArchive.



Rayhan,M.(2011).AnalyzingclausebyHalliday’stransitivitysystem.JurnalIlmuSastra,vol.6(1),22-34.

Rodden,J.,&Rossi,J.(2012).TheCambridgeIntroductiontoGeorgeOrwell.CambridgeUniversityPress.

Rodden,J.(2014)."AHanging":GeorgeOrwell’sUnheraldedLiteraryBreakthrough.Concentric:LiteraryandCulturalStudies,40(1),19-33.

Schabas,W.A.,&Schabas,W.(2002).Theabolitionofthedeathpenaltyininternationallaw.CambridgeUniversityPress.

Schultz,D.A.(2014).TheEncyclopediaofAmericanLaw.InfobasePublishing.

SCHWEIZER,B.(2001).GEORGEORWELL.InRadicalsontheRoad:ThePoliticsofEnglishTravelWritinginthe1930s(pp.17-36).CHARLOTTESVILLE;LONDON.

Simpson,P.(2004)Stylistics:Aresourcebookforstudents.London:Routledge.

Smith,J.(Ed.).(2019).TheCambridgeCompaniontoBritishLiteratureofthe1930s.CambridgeUniversityPress.

Song,Z.(2013).TransitivityanalysisofARoseforFamily.TheoryandPracticeinLanguageStudies,3(12).Doi:10.4304/tpIs.3.12.2291-2295.

Stansky,P.,&Abrahams,W.M.(1994).TheUnknownOrwell:Orwell,theTransformation.StanfordUniversityPress.

Stolz,J.(1873).Murder,CapitalPunishment,andtheLaw.UnionPublishingCompany.TheUniversityofCalifornia.

Tarrayo,V.N.(2014).CouplingofStrangeBedfellows(?):StylisticsasLinkbetweenLinguisticsandLiterature.InternationalJournaloflanguagesandLiteratures.2(2),99-120

Thackeray,W.M.(1884).AnEssayontheGeniusofGeorgeCruikshank:ReprintedVerbatimfrom"TheWestminsterReview".GeorgeRedway.

Thompson,R.C.(2019).Fire,Ice,andPhysics:TheScienceofGameofThrones.MITPress.

Tymieniecka,A.T.(Ed.).(2002).Thevisibleandtheinvisibleintheinterplaybetweenphilosophy,literatureandreality(Vol.75).SpringerScience&BusinessMedia.

Walker,R.H.(1991).InsideorOutsidetheWhale:GeorgeOrwell'sArtandPolemic.

WOLOCH,A.(2016).Conclusion:HappyOrwell.InOrOrwell:WritingandDemocraticSocialism(pp.317-326).Cambridge,Massachusetts;London,England:HarvardUniversityPress.

Wu,D.D.(Ed.).(2008).DiscoursesofculturalChinaintheglobalizingage(Vol.1).HongKongUniversityPress.

Yaghoobi,M.(2009).ACriticalDiscourseAnalysisoftheSelectedIranianandAmericanPrintedMediaontheRepresentationofHizbullah-IsrealWar.JournalofInterculturalCommunication,21.



515

APPENDICES:A.Listofmaterialprocessclauses[46outof(+/-)115]

No. Materialprocessclausesof“AHanging”

Para:01;L:2

We[par:pro-form:actor]werewaiting[pro:material]outsidethecondemnedcells[circ:pre.ph:location;spatial],arowofshedsfrontedwithdoublebars[circ:appo.1:location;spatial],likesmallanimalscages[circ:pre.ph;appo:location;spatial].1

Para:02;L:6

They[par:pro-form:actor]crowded[pro:material]veryclose[circ:manner;quality]abouthim[cicr:pre.ph: location;spatial],withtheirhands[circ:pre.ph:accompaniment]alwayson him [circumstance post qualifier] in a careful caressing grip [circ: pre. ph: location;spatial].2

Para:02;L:8-9

which[par:pro-form:actor]mayjump[pro:material]back[circ: location;spatial]intothewater[circ:pre.ph:location;spatial]3

Para:03;L:1

Eighto’clock[par:NP:goal]struck[pro:material]4

A.2.Listofmaterialprocessclauses

No. Materialprocessclausesof“AHanging”Para:05;L:1

Well,quick[circ:manner;quality]march[pro:material],then[circ:location;temporal].5

Para:05;L:1

Theprisoners[par:NP:actor]can’tget[pro:material]theirbreakfast[par:NP:goal].6


No. Materialprocessclausesof“AHanging”Para:06;L:6-8

It[par:pro-form:actor]came[pro:material]boundingamongus[participantqualifier]withaloud volley of barks [circ: accompaniment: comitative], and leapt [pro: material] round us[circ:location;spatial]waggingitswholebody[participantqualifier],wildwithgleeatfindingsomanyhumanbeingstogether[participantqualifier].7,8

Para:6;L:8-10

Foramoment(circ:extent;duration]it[par:pro-form:actor]pranced[pro:material]roundus [circ: location; spatial], and then [circ: location; temporal], beforeanyone [par:pro-form;actor]]couldstop[pro:material] it[par:pro-form:goal], it[par:pro-form:actor]hadmade[pro:material]adash [par:NP:goal] for theprisoner [circ: cause;purpose] , and jumping[participantqualifier]triedtolick[pro:material]hisface[par:NP:goal].9.10,11,12

Para:8;L:4

Itsyaps[par:actor]echoed[pro:material]fromthejailwails[circ:location;spatial].13



And once [circ: location; temporal], in spite of themenwho [par: pro-form: actor] gripped[pro:material]him[par:pro-form:goal]byeachshoulder[circ:manner,means]he[par:pro-form: actor] stepped [pro:material] slightly [circ:manner; quality] to avoid a puddle [circ:cause;purpose]onthepath[circ.Location;spatial].14,15

Para:10;L:1-2

What[par:pro-form:goal]it[par:proform:actor]meansmaterialtodestroy[pro:material]ahealthy,consciousman[par:NP:goal].16

Para:10;L:4-5

All theorgansofhisbody[par:NP:actor]wereworking[pro:material]–bowls[par:noun:actor]digesting[pro:material]food[par:noun:goal],skin[par:noun:actor]renewing[pro:material]itself[par:pro-form:goal],nails[par:noun:actor] growing[pro:material],tissues[par: noun: actor] forming [pro: material] -all[par: pro-form: actor] toiling away [pro:material],insolemnfoolery[circ:manner].17,18,19,20,21,22

Para:10;L:10

Oneof us [par: pro-form:actor]wouldbegone [pro:material], – onemind less, oneworldless.23



A.5.ListofmaterialprocessclausesNo. Materialprocessclausesof“AHanging”Para:12;L:1-2

And,then[circ:location;temporal],whenthenoose[par:NP:range]wasfixed[pro:material],the prisoner [par:NP: actor] began crying out [pro: material] on his god [circ: location;spatial].24,25

Para:13;L:1-2

Thesteady,muffedcryingfromtheprisoner[par:NP:actor]went[pro:material]onandon[circ: extent: duration], Ram! Ram! Ram! [participant’s apposition] never faltering for aninstant[circ:manner;frequencyandextent;duration].26

Para:13;L:4-5

Kill [pro: material] him [par; pro-form: goal] quickly [circ: manner; quality], get [pro:material] it[par:pro-form:goal]over, stop[pro:material] thatabominablenoise[par:pro-form:goal]!27,28



I [par: pro-form:actor] letgoof [pro:material] the dog [par:NP: range], and it [par:pro-form:actor]]galloped[pro:material]immediately[circ:location;temporal]tothebackofthegallows[circ: location; spatial];but,whengot[pro:material]there[circ: location; spatial] it[par: pro-form: actor] stopped [pro: material] short [circ: extent ; duration], barked [pro:material], and then [circ: location; temporal] retreated [pro: material] into a corner of theyard[circ: location;spatial],whereit[par:pro-form]stood[pro:material]amongtheweeds[circ:pre.ph:location;spatial].29,30,31,32,33,34,35

Para:16;L:2-3

He[par:pro-form:actor]backedout[pro:material]fromtheunderthegallows[circ:pre.ph:location;spatial],andblewout[pro:material]adeepbreath[par:NP:goal].36,37

Para:17;L:3-4

Theconvicts[par:NP:actor],underthecommandofwarders[circ:location;temporal]armedwith lathis [cicr: accompaniment; comitataive], were already [circ: location; temporal]receiving[pro:material]theirbreakfast[par:NP:goal].38


No. Materialprocessclausesof“AHanging”Para:17;L:6

it[par:pro-form:actor]seemed[pro:material]quiteahomely,jollyscene[par:NP:range],afterthehanging[circ:location:temporal].39

Para:17;L:6-7

An enormous relief [par: NP: actor] had come [pro: material] upon us [circ: location;spatial]now[circ:location;temporal]thatthejob[par:NP:goal]wasdone[pro:material].40.41

Para:18;L:1-3

TheEurasian boy [par:NP:actor]walking besideme [participant qualifier] nodded [pro:material] towards the way we [par: pro-form: actor] had come [pro: material], with aknowingsmile[circ:pre.ph.:accompaniment;comitative].Hisappeal[par :NP:goal]hadbeendismissed[pro:material].42,43,44

Para:23L:1-2

Thesuperintendent[par:NP:actor]grinned[pro:material]inatolerantway[circ:pre.ph.:manner;qualifier]45

Para:24;L:3-4

We all [par: pro-form: actor] had [pro:material] a drink [par:NP: goal] altogether [circ:manner; quality], native and European [participant appo], quite amicably [circ: manner;quality].46



517

B.Listofrelationalprocessclauses(13outof23)No. Relationalprocessclausesof“AHanging”Para:01;L:1

It [par: pro-form: career] was [pro: relational: intensive, circumstantial] in Burma [par:identifier],asoddenmorning[par:NP:attribute;identifier].1

Para:01;L:3-4

Eachcell[par:NP:career]was[pro:relational:intensive]quitebare[par:attribute]within[circ: location; spatial] except for a plank bed and a pot of drinking water [.circ:accompaniment]2

Para:01;L:7

These [par: pro-form: career] were [pro: relational: intensive] condemned men[par:identifier] due to be hanged [circ: cause; purpose] within the next week or two [circ:location;temporal].3

Para:02;L:1-2

He [par: pro-form: career] was [pro: relational: intensive] a Hindu [par: NP: identifier;attribute],apunywispofaman[participantapposition],withashavenheadandvagueliquideyes[participantqualifier].4

Para:02;L:2-3

He[par:pro-form:career]had[pro:relational:possessive]athick,sproutingmoustache[par:attribute;identifier],absurdlytoobigforhisbody,ratherlikethemoustacheofacomicmanonthefilms[participantqualifier].5

Para:02;L:9-10

But, he [par: pro-form: career] stood [pro: relational: intensive] quite unresisting [par:attribute;identifier],yieldinghisarmslimplytotheropes[participantqualifier].6

Para:03;L:3-4

He [par: pro-form: career] was [pro: relational: intensive] an army doctor [par: attribute;identifier],withagreytoothbrushmoustacheandagruffvoice[participantqualifier].7

Para:03;L:5

Theman[par:NP:career]oughttohavebeen[pro:relational:intensive]dead[par:attribute]bythistime[circ:location;temporal].8

Para:06;L:10

Everyone[par:pro-form:career]stood[pro:relational: intensive]aghast[par:attribute],tootakenaback[par:attribute]eventograbatthedog.9

Para:10;L:1

It[par:pro-form:career]is[pro:relational:intensive]curious[par:attribute].10

Para:10;L:3

whenit[par:pro-form:career]is[pro:relational:intensive]infulltide[par:identifier].11

Para:12;L:2-4

It [par: pro-form: career]was [pro: relational: intensive] high, reiterated cry of Ram!Ram!Ram! [par: attribute, identifier], not urgent and fearful like a prayer or a cry for help, butsteady,rhythmical,almostlikethetollingofabell[participantqualifiers].12

Para:24;L:4-5

Thedeadman [par:NP: career]was [pro: relational: circumstantial]ahundredyardsaway[par:identifier]13

C.Listofmentalprocessclauses(16outof16)No. Mentalprocessclausesof“AHanging”Para:8;L:4-5

Theprisoner[par:NP:senser],inthegraspofthetwowarders[circ:location;spatial],lookedon[pro:mental]curiously[circ:manner:quality].1

Para:9;L:1-2

I [par: pro-form: senser] watched [pro: mental] the bare back of the prisoner [par: NP:phenomenon]marchinginfrontofme[participantqualifier].2

Para:10;L:2-3

WhenI[par:pro-form:senser]saw[pro:mental]theprisoner[par:NP:phenomenon]stepasidetoavoidthepuddle[circ:cause:purpose],I[par:pro-form:senser]saw[pro:mental]themystery[par:NP:phenomenon] , theunspeakablewrongness[participant’sapposition],ofcuttingalifeshortwhenitisinfulltide.3,4

Para:10;L:7-8

Hiseyes[par:NP:senser] saw[pro:mental]theyellowgraveland thegreywalls[par:NP:phenomenon] , and his brain [par: NP: senser] still [circ: location; temporal]remembered[pro: mental], foresaw [pro: mental], -reasoned[pro: mental], even aboutpuddles[circ:matter].5,6,7,8

Para:10;L:8-9

He and we [par: NP: senser] are a party of men walking together, seeing [pro: mental],hearing [pro:mental], feeling [pro: mental], understanding [pro: mental] the sameworld[phenomenon].9,10,11

Para:13;L:6-7

We[par:pro-form:senser]lookedat[pro:mental]thelashed,hoodedmanonthedrop[par:phenomenon],andlistenedto[pro:mental]hiscries[par:phenomenon],-eachcryanothersecondoflife[participant’sapposition].12,13

Para:16;L:3-4

He [par: pro-form: senser] glanced [pro: mental] at [pro: mental] his wrist watch [par:phenomenon].14

Para:17;L:7-8

One [par: pro-form: senser] felt [pro: mental] an impulse [par: phenomenon] to sing, tobreakintoarun,[circ:cause:purpose]tosnigger[circ:cause:purpose].15

Para:23;L:1

I [par: pro-form: senser] found [pro: mental] that I was laughing quite loudly [par:phenomenon].16



D.Listofverbalprocessclauses(7outof11)No. verbalprocessclausesof“AHanging”Para:3;L:4-5

‘ForGod’ssakehurryup[par:verbiage],Francis’[par:noun: receiver],he[par:pro-form:sayer]said[pro:verbal]terribly[circ:manner:quality]1

Para:4;L:2

‘Yes sir, yes sir,’ [par: verbiage], he [sayer] bubbled [pro: verbal]. ‘All iss satisfactorilyprepared.’[verbiage]

Para:7;L:1

‘Wholetthatbloodybruteinhere?’[Verbiage]said[pro:verbal]thesuperintendent[sayer]angrily[circ:manner:quality].‘Catchit[verbiage],someone![receiver]’2

Para:14;L:2

‘Chalo!’[verbiage]he[sayer]shouted[pro:verbal]fiercely[circ:manner:quality]

Para:16;L:2

`He’salright’[verbiage]said[pro:verbal]thesuperintendent[sayer].3

Para:16;L:4

‘Eightminutespasteight.Well,that’sallforthismorning,thankGod’[verbiage]

Para:18;L:2-5

‘Doyouknow[verbiage],sir[receiver],ourfriend(hemeantthedeadman),whenheheardhisappealhadbeendismissed,hepissedon thefloorofhiscell.Fromfright.–Kindlytakeone of my cigarettes [verbiage], sir [receiver],. Do you not admire my new silver case[verbiage],sir[receiver]?Fromtheboxwalla,tworupeeseightannas.ClassyEuropeanstyle[verbiage].

Para:20;L:1-2

‘Well,sir[receiver],allhasspassedoffwiththeutmostsatisfactoriness.’[verbiage]

Para:21;L:1

Wrigglingabout,eh?That’sbad,’[verbiage]said[pro:verbal]thesuperintendent[sayer].4

Para:22;L:1-5

Ach,sir[receiver] it issworsewhentheybecomerefectory![verbiage]Oneman,I[sayer]recall,clungtothebarsofhisscagewhenwewenttotakehimout.Youwillscarcelycredit[verbiage], sir [receiver], it took six warders to dislodge him, three pulling at eachleg[verbiage].Wereasonedwithhim[verbiage].“Mydearfellow,[receiver]”we[sayer]said[pro:verbal],“thinkofallthepainyouarecausingtous!’[Verbiage]”Butno,hewouldnotlisten!Ach,hewassverytroublesome![verbiage]5

Para:23;L:2

‘You’dbetterallcomeoutandhaveadrink,[verbiage]’he[sayer] said[pro:verbal]quitegenially[circ:manner:quality].6

Para:24;L:1-2

‘Pulling at his legs! [verbiage] exclaimed [pro: verbal] a Burmese magistrate suddenly[sayer]7

E.Listofbehavioralprocessclauses(3outof3)

No. Behavioralprocessclausesof“AHanging”Para:19 ;L:01

Severalpeople[par:NP:behaver]laughed[pro:behavioral].1

Para:23 ;L:01

I [par: pro-form: behaver] was laughing [pro: behavioral] quite loudly [circ: manner;quality].2

Para:23;L:01

Everyone[behaver]waslaughing[pro:behavioral].3

F.Listofexistentialprocessclauses(1outof1)

No. existentialprocessclausesof“AHanging”Para:15;L:1

There [introductory sub.] was [pro: ex.] a clanking noise and then a dead silence [par:existent].1

alam, m. (2020). continuous relevance to ‘unspeakable

Documents