The clerk's tale features a different but prominent set of oppositions between private and public from those we observed in the Franklin's Tale. Walter's supposed murders are thought to have been committed ‘prively’ but are muttered about ‘comunly’ (IV, 725–6); the repudiated Griselda does not show that she is offended either ‘biforn the folk, ne eek in hire absence’ (921); Walter's initial test, performed ‘allone a-nyght’, balances later tests that are imposed ‘in open audience’ (790). These oppositions are, clearly, linked to the relationship between inner feeling and outer show of behaviour that is examined throughout the Tale. Chaucer portrays Walter as a dissembler, showing a face that does not match his true feelings, with a frequency not found in the sources. At the same time, the apparent continuity between Griselda's outer appearance of obedient constancy and her inner will shocks the reader as she seems to be complicit in the murder of her own children.

In the last chapter, we saw that medieval married couples conventionally behaved differently in public and in private. A greater degree of obedience and deference was expected from wives in public, and was thought to enhance their husbands' reputation. In private, a more equal relationship often existed, and wives had licence to disagree with their husbands, upbraid and advise them. In the Clerk's Tale, a completely different pattern is played out.