[Wilshire]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2014/09/01/344043763/our-use-of-little-words-can-uh-reveal-hidden-interests
Interesting news cast about words. You can listen to it at the above or read the transcript.
There should be more links that go deeper into the interviewee's research.


Among other interesting findings:

But some of his most interesting work has to do with power dynamics. He says that by analyzing language you can easily tell who among two people has power in a relationship, and their relative social status.

"It's amazingly simple," Pennebaker says, "Listen to the relative use of the word "I."

What you find is completely different from what most people would think. The person with the higher status uses the word "I" less.

[Garet Jax]

Interesting... Checking e-mails now.

[Wilshire]

At the end, he claimed that its unlikely that by changing the words you can change your self, but I disagree completely. You can trick yourself . Fake it till you make it. If everyone preserves you as having high social standing, you will eventually be put in a role by others that believe it suits you. That's how it all works, whether or not it is genuine is largely irrelevant.

[Kellais]

I think the problem is more that to try to use speech-patterns that are contrary to your normal usus will be almost impossible...especially if you want to sound natural and have an acceptable speech-speed/flow. So i don't think that you'll be very successful in faking it.

[Garet Jax]

I think the problem is more that to try to use speech-patterns that are contrary to your normal usus will be almost impossible...especially if you want to sound natural and have an acceptable speech-speed/flow. So i don't think that you'll be very successful in faking it.

Not sure about that our dear "TON".  One of my bosses, when editing an important e-mail several years back told me that he wanted me to use "Us/We" in lieu of "I/me".  After making a concerted effort to do so, the e-mails that are sent now sound like they are coming from my company rather than a person that works at my company.  But, if you check my posts and interactions in the Quorum, I use I all the time

This might me such a magnified small example it doesn't really make that much difference, but the tone of my e-mails now match the example of someone in a power position rather than someone speaking to the person in power.

On the other hand, maybe I am only convincing myself and no one else...

[Kellais]

Well i was more talking about speech...talking to other people etc. . The written word is easier to manipulate if you have the time to "fake it" all the time. But when you have to talk you do not normally have the time to think about sentence structure minutae and you can not modify after the fact

[Wilshire]

Yeah it would be very hard to do that in speech, and like you say, near impossible to do in conversation, but I meant electronic communication. And, if you start with emails, habits might eventually work their way into speech (maybe).

[The Sharmat]

There are actually people that regularly practice speaking on their own time with the aid of trainers instead of just carrying out all speech spontaneously.

They're called Politicians, and they're all liars. Don't trust 'em.

[Kellais]

Politicians are a good example for sure...but my theory is that even those (and if you look at all the fuck ups they produce in their speeches, i am most probably right) fail with truly be able to alter their natural speech patterns.

As to the written word, i guess it is possible. While i am sure that you'll fail from now and then even there, the fact that you can hold off on sending an email and look at it over and over again is surely upping your chance of "faking it".

[The Sharmat]

Politicians are a good example for sure...but my theory is that even those (and if you look at all the fuck ups they produce in their speeches, i am most probably right) fail with truly be able to alter their natural speech patterns.

When you give a big speech every few days you're gonna have a fuck up every once in awhile. Stumbling over a word here or there doesn't mean that the rest of the speech is delivered in a natural way rather than a carefully prepared way.

[Kellais]

Problem is, speeches of politicians before a camera are skripted like written stuff. Most often the politicians didn't even write them themselves. So i am not sure that even counts.
And stumbling over a word here or there is nothing i'd call a fuck up. But i agree that you can also fake a stumbling and yes, that does not mean that the speech is delivered in a natural way. But that is not what i was saying (just in case you were under the impression that i did).

[Madness]

There are also descriptions of inherent biases concerning finding the relevancy of "ums" and "uhs" as more convincing than the doctored speech that avoids them.

There are actually people that regularly practice speaking on their own time with the aid of trainers instead of just carrying out all speech spontaneously.

They're called Politicians,

I also agree with this. Same with thespians. You'll notice this all the time in comparing them between their performance versus their interviews.

There are potentially Dunyain-lite in the world, in this sense.

[Wilshire]

Maybe this is why Our last 2 presidents had such awkward speech habits. Bush always game off as "slow", and Obama's every other utterance is "uhhh".

I just thought that the age of great speeches ended sometime around WWII with Hitler and Churchill.


At least in the US, it doesn't seem to matter what our leaders say. They just put on a red or a blue jacket and everyone already knows all they need to. This probably contributes to the lack of effort in press releases. After all, why bother since no one is listening anyway?