The Cultural Implications of Silence Around the World (2020)(rw-3.com)
rw-3.com
The Cultural Implications of Silence Around the World (2020)
https://www.rw-3.com/blog/cultural-implications-of-silence
37 comments
Yet another misuse of the word "Bahasa" as if that's shorthand for "Indonesian".
"Bahasa" literally just means "language", the Indonesian language doesn't have eponyms, so to say "He is Australian" you have to include the noun "person", so "Dia orang Australia" (Sound familiar? "orang utan" means "jungle person"). Same deal with language/bahasa.
People saying "I speak Bahasa" sounds to me like people saying "I speak Sprache" to say they know German or "I speak langue" for French. It's eye-rollingly obnoxious.
"Bahasa" literally just means "language", the Indonesian language doesn't have eponyms, so to say "He is Australian" you have to include the noun "person", so "Dia orang Australia" (Sound familiar? "orang utan" means "jungle person"). Same deal with language/bahasa.
People saying "I speak Bahasa" sounds to me like people saying "I speak Sprache" to say they know German or "I speak langue" for French. It's eye-rollingly obnoxious.
And don't forget Bahasa Malaysia
Interesting. It’s similar to the use of the word “chai” in the US. It originally means tea, but in the US it is used to mean a specific blend/preparation (usually masala), so they say “I’ll have a chai tea”, which literally means “I’ll have a tea tea”.
I thought masala meant spice mix?
Spiced tea is a bit more specific than tea tea, but not much more
Spiced tea is a bit more specific than tea tea, but not much more
Eye-rollingly obnoxious? I've literally heard native Indonesians refer to their language as just "bahasa", though admittedly those same speakers told me off for doing it myself. So whilst I agree "bahasa" has a commonly incorrect usage I don't think it is due to the typical "White Ignorance". I mean at least the author actually went to the effort of learning a non-European language right?
It's like "literally" in English has _changed_ its meaning. Yeah of course it originally meant non-figuratively, but it is clear to all that value language as a medium of communication (rather than a measure of intellectual status) that it now has another meaning as an intensifier.
It's like "literally" in English has _changed_ its meaning. Yeah of course it originally meant non-figuratively, but it is clear to all that value language as a medium of communication (rather than a measure of intellectual status) that it now has another meaning as an intensifier.
Cue DFW's rant on silence and Pulp Fiction's uncomfortable silence scene [1, 2].
The author mentions Japan but doesn't mention aizuchi, a constant backchanneling that signals attentiveness that I'd classify as the opposite of silent pontificating [3].
[1] https://youtu.be/iGLzWdT7vGc?t=1794
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnVX-uv-QPc
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aizuchi
The author mentions Japan but doesn't mention aizuchi, a constant backchanneling that signals attentiveness that I'd classify as the opposite of silent pontificating [3].
[1] https://youtu.be/iGLzWdT7vGc?t=1794
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnVX-uv-QPc
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aizuchi
Aizuchi are a universal phenomenon. "Yeah, uh-huh, exactly, I know right" serve the same function in English.
Backchanneling is not exclusive to Japanese, but overuse in other languages can be perceived as rude and a sign of inattentiveness. You need to experience a casual Japanese conversation to realize how prevalent it is [1]. After my stint there, people noticed how much I backchannel even in my other languages.
[1] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/language-in-society/...
"The findings reveal that backchannels of several types are displayed far more frequently by Japanese listeners."
[1] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/language-in-society/...
"The findings reveal that backchannels of several types are displayed far more frequently by Japanese listeners."
> Given the different ways silence is used in China (a listening culture) and Canada (a speaking culture) ...
I observed the opposite. When I speak Chinese to Chinese people in Toronto, Canada - friends/family/business - I find that they speak faster, are more likely to interrupt or talk over me, and tend to push their viewpoints instead of waiting to hear yours.
I've interacted with Chinese vs. Canadian bankers, salespeople, doctors, etc., and the contrast is noticeable for me.
This isn't a statement about whether one way is better (e.g. I find the Chinese are more straightforward with their intentions, whereas Canadians leave more things implied); this is just an observation about tendencies.
I observed the opposite. When I speak Chinese to Chinese people in Toronto, Canada - friends/family/business - I find that they speak faster, are more likely to interrupt or talk over me, and tend to push their viewpoints instead of waiting to hear yours.
I've interacted with Chinese vs. Canadian bankers, salespeople, doctors, etc., and the contrast is noticeable for me.
This isn't a statement about whether one way is better (e.g. I find the Chinese are more straightforward with their intentions, whereas Canadians leave more things implied); this is just an observation about tendencies.
Yeah, this is true in China as well IME. Perhaps TFA is extrapolating from experiences in other East Asian countries?
Incidentally, one of the most high-strung, anxious people I’ve ever met was a Buddhist. There was nothing Zen-like about this person.
That makes sense if he was a convert to Buddhism, because Buddhism in the West is marketed as a treatment for anxious people.
Nordics and say Japanese may be listening cultures but in such a profoundly different way that it is hard to put them in the same group.
Japanese and Koreans speak in a very indirect and polite fashion. Us Nordics tend to be very blunt and direct. But we share this with the Dutch and Germans.
For me the main dividers are between direct and indirect speakers.
Like Americans like to keep things a bit fluffy and casual until they know you better or have sort of warmed up in the conversation. We are often opposite. We like going straight to the point and do the fluffy stuff last as way of ending a conversation.
Japanese and Koreans speak in a very indirect and polite fashion. Us Nordics tend to be very blunt and direct. But we share this with the Dutch and Germans.
For me the main dividers are between direct and indirect speakers.
Like Americans like to keep things a bit fluffy and casual until they know you better or have sort of warmed up in the conversation. We are often opposite. We like going straight to the point and do the fluffy stuff last as way of ending a conversation.
This is known as "context". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-context_and_low-context_c...
The Western European and Scandinavian cultures are often used as the classic example of low context cultures and asian and middle eastern ones as the classic as high context cultures.
Look up the art of Yang Liu and the "Ost triff West" project ( http://www.thedailytop.com/24-infographic-shows-differences-... )
Though, even within a culture, there are graduations of context. Rural tends to be higher context than urban (pull up https://www.bigtop.org/tentshowradio.html and listen to the last minute of the podcast... "well, I suppose..." - that's rural midwest US - and there are different high/low context cultures across the US - http://robslink.com/SAS/democd83/us_regional_cultures_map.ht... ).
This can show up in some odd spots:
* https://webdata-solutions.com/en/2018/08/01/why-you-should-c...
* https://langsolinc.com/cross-cultural-communication/
There's a lot of other material on this that is rather interesting.
The Western European and Scandinavian cultures are often used as the classic example of low context cultures and asian and middle eastern ones as the classic as high context cultures.
Look up the art of Yang Liu and the "Ost triff West" project ( http://www.thedailytop.com/24-infographic-shows-differences-... )
Though, even within a culture, there are graduations of context. Rural tends to be higher context than urban (pull up https://www.bigtop.org/tentshowradio.html and listen to the last minute of the podcast... "well, I suppose..." - that's rural midwest US - and there are different high/low context cultures across the US - http://robslink.com/SAS/democd83/us_regional_cultures_map.ht... ).
This can show up in some odd spots:
* https://webdata-solutions.com/en/2018/08/01/why-you-should-c...
* https://langsolinc.com/cross-cultural-communication/
There's a lot of other material on this that is rather interesting.
America vs Nordics is almost the opposite ends. Americans will ask you fluffy questions if they don't know you -- not expecting an answer! -- while Northern Europeans will mostly engage strangers factually and to the point. And you don't go asking strangers about how their day has been, that's none of your business, and you wouldn't do that unless you were actually offering to help deal with their stresses or such.
Are Americans really fluffy?
Many of the questions people perceive as fluffy aren't actually questions...
How you doing? etc that isn't a question and you aren't supposed to give a detailed response- it is basically just a dumb was of saying hi.
When a grocery store cashier asks that question, yes it is very fluffy and no information is expected in response.
For contrast, in Northern Europe a cashier would greet you with the local version of "Hi", "Hello" or "Good morning". And them not verbally greeting you would be socially acceptable too!
For contrast, in Northern Europe a cashier would greet you with the local version of "Hi", "Hello" or "Good morning". And them not verbally greeting you would be socially acceptable too!
When thinking of that as the default, within the culture, “we know what it actually means” is the most salient.
When thinking of that as not the default, in a cultural comparison, “how are analogous-role conversational elements expressed differently” is the most salient. So compared to a culture in which you don't ask that so cheerily, obligatorily, without-‘really’-meaning, yes, it totally is fluffy.
(Speaking as someone who's theoretically American but culturally ambiguous, who's recently been suggested by someone reviewing my social skills in a professional capacity to inject more low-content happy-mood pleasantries into my conversation—they may have actually used the word “American” in the process, and I hardly disagree with the connection. Of course, that's papering over a lot of intra-American variation too.)
When thinking of that as not the default, in a cultural comparison, “how are analogous-role conversational elements expressed differently” is the most salient. So compared to a culture in which you don't ask that so cheerily, obligatorily, without-‘really’-meaning, yes, it totally is fluffy.
(Speaking as someone who's theoretically American but culturally ambiguous, who's recently been suggested by someone reviewing my social skills in a professional capacity to inject more low-content happy-mood pleasantries into my conversation—they may have actually used the word “American” in the process, and I hardly disagree with the connection. Of course, that's papering over a lot of intra-American variation too.)
Uh, speaking as an american, yes, it is 100% actually a question, and yes, I do in fact want to actually know how the other person is doing. I'm fine with them leaving anything out they don't feel comfortable disclosing, but … if they do feel comfortable, it's an invitation to just cut through the nonsense and become a friend. It's the most no-nonsense way to bulldoze through the usual pointless formalities and actually get to know someone.
It's a deliberate short circuit to a real human problem - the problem of two compatible people (whether friends or lovers) being artificially delayed on connecting with each other because of "customarily enforced" protocol on how quickly they're allowed to be familiar. That problem is bad enough that it's a staple trope in rom-coms and buddy cop films - and it frequently leads to tragedy because of how short life is, and how opportunities don't last.
It feels like there are a lot of people in the american cultural milieu who've picked this up from other groups of americans (america's a huge country with tons of different culture groups), but … are missing the absolutely CRITICAL ingredient of taking it at face value.
It is exactly what it looks like; it's not facetious, it's not fake, and anyone who treats it like that is kinda cargo-culting it.
It's a deliberate short circuit to a real human problem - the problem of two compatible people (whether friends or lovers) being artificially delayed on connecting with each other because of "customarily enforced" protocol on how quickly they're allowed to be familiar. That problem is bad enough that it's a staple trope in rom-coms and buddy cop films - and it frequently leads to tragedy because of how short life is, and how opportunities don't last.
It feels like there are a lot of people in the american cultural milieu who've picked this up from other groups of americans (america's a huge country with tons of different culture groups), but … are missing the absolutely CRITICAL ingredient of taking it at face value.
It is exactly what it looks like; it's not facetious, it's not fake, and anyone who treats it like that is kinda cargo-culting it.
> How you doing? etc that isn't a question and you aren't supposed to give a detailed response- it is basically just a dumb was of saying hi.
That's a gross oversimplification; the particular question used as an example may or may not be a genuine question and whether it is or isn't varies from person to person and, even for the same person asking, often by who they are asking and the context.
Treating it as a non-question to be blown off with a ritual “fine” can be anywhere from the correct formulaic response to an acceptable way of indicating you don't really want to discuss specifics to a significant insult.
That's a gross oversimplification; the particular question used as an example may or may not be a genuine question and whether it is or isn't varies from person to person and, even for the same person asking, often by who they are asking and the context.
Treating it as a non-question to be blown off with a ritual “fine” can be anywhere from the correct formulaic response to an acceptable way of indicating you don't really want to discuss specifics to a significant insult.
In my experience at a software company located in the Midwest, I find most engineers engage in a hard listening culture. They have things that may want to say but do not want to say their thoughts for a myriad of reasons.
My (soft) heuristic towards engagement in meetings is to call on others and ask their thoughts. Sometimes I get a squeamish non-answer but sometimes I get a answer worth it’s weight in gold.
There are some who engage in a hard speaking culture, too. My heuristic operates to hear from everyone, when practical and possible.
My (soft) heuristic towards engagement in meetings is to call on others and ask their thoughts. Sometimes I get a squeamish non-answer but sometimes I get a answer worth it’s weight in gold.
There are some who engage in a hard speaking culture, too. My heuristic operates to hear from everyone, when practical and possible.
What is meant by hard listening? I’ve never heard that. If engineers are reluctant to speak up its probably because years of experience that management/regular people just wants yes/no/we can do that type answers. Giving technical answers to things is sometimes perceived as aggressive or intimidating because the people who are supposed to be in charge often can’t follow all details. It takes a rare boss to truly trust the engineers.
[deleted]
As a Latin American (of Italian heritage!) that moved to the US, I learned this the hard way.
Many times, as an introvert, I sometimes like to be silent myself, even if I'm enjoying the moment. As the article say, this doesn't tend to be a problem in Latin America, because people are always talking over each other (and that's fine!), so anyone keeping quiet works ok.
But in the US, you're expected to talk, so keeping quiet means something is wrong. I finally got tired of people asking "what's wrong? why aren't you saying anything?" (and not understanding when I answer that nothing is wrong and that yes, I'm having a good time). So I started making a point of saying something of no value every now and then, to fill my quota. This seems to make everyone happy.
Many times, as an introvert, I sometimes like to be silent myself, even if I'm enjoying the moment. As the article say, this doesn't tend to be a problem in Latin America, because people are always talking over each other (and that's fine!), so anyone keeping quiet works ok.
But in the US, you're expected to talk, so keeping quiet means something is wrong. I finally got tired of people asking "what's wrong? why aren't you saying anything?" (and not understanding when I answer that nothing is wrong and that yes, I'm having a good time). So I started making a point of saying something of no value every now and then, to fill my quota. This seems to make everyone happy.
I've also had the problem of being overly quiet at times, in meetings typically. Unfortunately it gives the impression of being unengaged, when in reality I may just be thinking deeply about something. My solution, analogous to yours, is to ask questions -- which IMHO may be quite valuable at times!
As an American living in Finland you find that there is no such thing in Finnish culture as an "awkward silence". And (more humorously) when there's a group of people all talking, and someone says something really stupid and embarrassing, it's rare that someone steps in to save the offender's bacon by moving the conversation onward. Instead the stupid just hangs in the air for a looooong moment. Eye contact, knowing smiles. Highly entertaining.
While I generally appreciate silence more so than most, I've noticed a kind of unhealthy silence in certain work situations over the last 18 months.
While I've mostly enjoyed the pandemic-induced remote meetings via Teams/Zoom, et al, one thing that's annoyed me is people's unwillingness - when they don't turn on their cameras, which is 95% of the time in my org - to compensate for the fact that no one can see anyone else.
So someone will ask a question like "Does anyone have any questions?" In pre-pandemic days the questioner could scan the faces of those in the room and see people shaking their head "no". In virtual meetings with cameras off that's not possible. To me, that's awkward, and not in the good way that Uma's character in Pulp Fiction means[0]. Are people even paying attention? Did they hear me? Are they checking their email or otherwise multi-tasking?
So I've begun responding verbally to such questions and to otherwise fill the void that's left when no one wants to turn on a camera.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnVX-uv-QPc
While I've mostly enjoyed the pandemic-induced remote meetings via Teams/Zoom, et al, one thing that's annoyed me is people's unwillingness - when they don't turn on their cameras, which is 95% of the time in my org - to compensate for the fact that no one can see anyone else.
So someone will ask a question like "Does anyone have any questions?" In pre-pandemic days the questioner could scan the faces of those in the room and see people shaking their head "no". In virtual meetings with cameras off that's not possible. To me, that's awkward, and not in the good way that Uma's character in Pulp Fiction means[0]. Are people even paying attention? Did they hear me? Are they checking their email or otherwise multi-tasking?
So I've begun responding verbally to such questions and to otherwise fill the void that's left when no one wants to turn on a camera.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnVX-uv-QPc
A tip I stole from someone else (can’t remember who otherwise I’d credit) when asking a question in research interview is to stay silent until you’re feeling uncomfortable, and then count slowly another 3 seconds before asking a follow up prompt.
The majority of the time, people do have useful things to say if you are willing to give them the space to speak.