5 ms·

> You yourself are missing words in your communication like the word "have" in the quote above. Also, I don't know enough linguistic rules to correct you, but c

> You yourself are missing words in your communication like the word "have" in the quote above. Also, I don't know enough linguistic rules to correct you, but colloquially at least your title is better understood if you write it as "Why do some people not communicate clearly?" Thanks, corrected the mistakes. However, I wasn't referring to missing words (which can be inferred) or bad grammar. Actually I wasn't referring to written speech in particular. I was referring mostly to the way one structures their thought and expresses it to someone else. Also, the question was referring to native speakers (I'm not an English native speaker myself).

thwayunion 4y ago
> I was referring mostly to the way one structures their thought and expresses it to someone else. 1. it's still relevant in spoken language. Perhaps more so -- inflection, intonation, volume, and speed add a lot of subtlety to vocal communication that is even more difficult to pick up on than written communication. Pauses indicate punctuation. Tone can indicate something is less important. Volume and speed can be used in place of parentheses or even footnotes. Those are just the obvious things. There is so much information that is very difficult for non-native speakers to pick up on. Or at least is very difficult for me to pick up on. 2. They might be speaking in a way that parses well to a native ear but is deeply confusing to a non-native speaker. > Also, the question was referring to native speakers (I'm not an English native speaker myself). Here's a really important question: do other native speakers in your group express the same frustration about these SWEs? Communication is a two-way street. If they are 3/5 on communicating ideas and you are 3/5 on understanding ideas, then you may have issues that a person who is 5/5 on understanding ideas does not have. I want to stress that even if you were a 1/5 (you're not!!!), the onus would still on BOTH you and your team mates to communicate well. It's not just your job to get better at understanding their mediocre communication; it's also their job to be empathetic and learn how to communicate better with you. Example: I communicate a bit differently with non-native speakers in spoken communication. I slow my speech just a bit (not excessively -- I talk very fast naturally, so my slow is others' normal). I avoid complex wandering sentences with clauses that resolve on different sides of the sentence. I try to add more roadmaps and use more explicit communication. I rely less on intonation, inflection, and pauses to convey meaning when speaking. I made these changes after I worked in a country with a different language and realized how damn hard it was to understand that last 20% of information that everyone else seemed to be catching.
- _tom_ 4y ago
  People who can introspect as you are doing here are rarely the problem. It's the people who never think about other people's mental models (or even their own!) that are frequently hard to communicate with.
tasuki 4y ago
> However, I wasn't referring to missing words (which can be inferred) or bad grammar. Actually I wasn't referring to written speech in particular. I was referring mostly to the way one structures their thought and expresses it to someone else. It would appear that your initial post failed to communicate that clearly to awb.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4y ago
  It's also possible for a person to poorly apply their reading comprehension skills. FWIW, I did get the intended meaning from OP's post.
  - P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
    As did everyone else, this thread is more about a couple of contrarians acting smart. OP never claimed perfection, nor was it ever implied.
  - tasuki 4y ago
    Sure, my point was that communication is hard. I'm not saying it's necessarily OP's mistake.
njbooher 4y ago
The way people communicate verbally often reflects the way they think, which differs between people. Writing forces people to structure their thoughts more. Also, efficient communication requires knowing what your audience already knows.
- andrewingram 4y ago
  The best way I have to describe the way I think is “spatially”, I can’t really say more than that except to say it’s different to “visually”. The problem is that the best way to explain something is basically do a topological sort of the DAG representing what needs to be explained, some people are uncannily good at this and appear able to do it in real-time. I… cannot.
  - skydhash 4y ago
    My own way of thinking is both spatially and visually. I encode all my understanding into visual concepts (which may be very abstract), and link them to each other. That makes it difficult for me to do direct recall if I'm not given sufficient context. But makes it easy to connect things and do pattern matching. When I'm explaining, I found myself wandering down a particular path that I think the other person may not understand well, but can backtrack to the main conversation.
abracadaniel 4y ago
Everyone is running a complex neural network, that was formed by trial and error, to express complex and often abstract notions for which we may not even share a common context or concept. People think differently, and someone trying to express a concept is essentially walking through the mental model that they made for themselves. It may not work for you for a variety of reasons. Having acquired language via another culture might be enough to make it more difficult or frustrating to understand someone from a different background, even if you both now share the same language.
Izkata 4y ago
> I'm not an English native speaker myself So your posts don't really give this away to me, except for the dropped "have"/"has" that GP pointed out (I've seen this a lot from people who learned English as a second language, though I'm not confident enough to guess what your first language is). But it does give me two additional ideas that from a quick scroll downwards I don't think others have suggested: Language or culture. Language is unlikely but I do want to mention it as a possibility because I have a concrete example in English speakers learning Japanese: Implied subject. It's a common point of confusion with beginners that usually doesn't get a whole lot of explanation, other than "you have to infer it from the context" [0]. Maybe something similar is going on here, a piece of context that would be made more explicit in your first language that we usually skip or just imply in English? Culture is a possibility because I've seen it mentioned on here many times in the past, and I'm guessing if English isn't your first language and English speakers are confusing, you probably grew up in a (slightly?) different culture than you work in now, in addition to the language difference. I don't have good examples here, but what I remember is people talking about how people from some countries are very direct and in other countries that comes off as rude, and in the opposite direction the people trying to be polite sound like they're trying to avoid direct answers and it's hard to get them to say what they mean. That second one kind-of sounds like what you're describing here. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/japanese/comments/b8bae7/questions_about_implied_subject/ https://www.reddit.com/r/japanese/comments/b8bae7/questions_... Edit: Some people are posting links to culture-style differences further down: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33657314 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33657314
- dcminter 4y ago
  Early in my career I had an issue with some Indian colleagues who were using a little head wiggle that means "yes" or "go on" in that context, but to me at the time seemed more like a shrug or a "maybe". An observing colleague later explained to me - he said he enjoyed seeing me nod more and more vigorously and explaining my point in more and more detail as I unconsciously tried to elicit the expected "missing" nod of agreement/understanding from them... We live and learn.
  - 4y ago

thwayunion 4y ago

> I was referring mostly to the way one structures their thought and expresses it to someone else. 1. it's still relevant in spoken language. Perhaps more so -- inflection, intonation, volume, and speed add a lot of subtlety to vocal communication that is even more difficult to pick up on than written communication. Pauses indicate punctuation. Tone can indicate something is less important. Volume and speed can be used in place of parentheses or even footnotes. Those are just the obvious things. There is so much information that is very difficult for non-native speakers to pick up on. Or at least is very difficult for me to pick up on. 2. They might be speaking in a way that parses well to a native ear but is deeply confusing to a non-native speaker. > Also, the question was referring to native speakers (I'm not an English native speaker myself). Here's a really important question: do other native speakers in your group express the same frustration about these SWEs? Communication is a two-way street. If they are 3/5 on communicating ideas and you are 3/5 on understanding ideas, then you may have issues that a person who is 5/5 on understanding ideas does not have. I want to stress that even if you were a 1/5 (you're not!!!), the onus would still on BOTH you and your team mates to communicate well. It's not just your job to get better at understanding their mediocre communication; it's also their job to be empathetic and learn how to communicate better with you. Example: I communicate a bit differently with non-native speakers in spoken communication. I slow my speech just a bit (not excessively -- I talk very fast naturally, so my slow is others' normal). I avoid complex wandering sentences with clauses that resolve on different sides of the sentence. I try to add more roadmaps and use more explicit communication. I rely less on intonation, inflection, and pauses to convey meaning when speaking. I made these changes after I worked in a country with a different language and realized how damn hard it was to understand that last 20% of information that everyone else seemed to be catching.

_tom_ 4y ago
People who can introspect as you are doing here are rarely the problem. It's the people who never think about other people's mental models (or even their own!) that are frequently hard to communicate with.

tasuki 4y ago

> However, I wasn't referring to missing words (which can be inferred) or bad grammar. Actually I wasn't referring to written speech in particular. I was referring mostly to the way one structures their thought and expresses it to someone else. It would appear that your initial post failed to communicate that clearly to awb.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4y ago
It's also possible for a person to poorly apply their reading comprehension skills. FWIW, I did get the intended meaning from OP's post.
- P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
  As did everyone else, this thread is more about a couple of contrarians acting smart. OP never claimed perfection, nor was it ever implied.
- tasuki 4y ago
  Sure, my point was that communication is hard. I'm not saying it's necessarily OP's mistake.

njbooher 4y ago

The way people communicate verbally often reflects the way they think, which differs between people. Writing forces people to structure their thoughts more. Also, efficient communication requires knowing what your audience already knows.

andrewingram 4y ago
The best way I have to describe the way I think is “spatially”, I can’t really say more than that except to say it’s different to “visually”. The problem is that the best way to explain something is basically do a topological sort of the DAG representing what needs to be explained, some people are uncannily good at this and appear able to do it in real-time. I… cannot.
- skydhash 4y ago
  My own way of thinking is both spatially and visually. I encode all my understanding into visual concepts (which may be very abstract), and link them to each other. That makes it difficult for me to do direct recall if I'm not given sufficient context. But makes it easy to connect things and do pattern matching. When I'm explaining, I found myself wandering down a particular path that I think the other person may not understand well, but can backtrack to the main conversation.

abracadaniel 4y ago

Everyone is running a complex neural network, that was formed by trial and error, to express complex and often abstract notions for which we may not even share a common context or concept. People think differently, and someone trying to express a concept is essentially walking through the mental model that they made for themselves. It may not work for you for a variety of reasons. Having acquired language via another culture might be enough to make it more difficult or frustrating to understand someone from a different background, even if you both now share the same language.

Izkata 4y ago

> I'm not an English native speaker myself So your posts don't really give this away to me, except for the dropped "have"/"has" that GP pointed out (I've seen this a lot from people who learned English as a second language, though I'm not confident enough to guess what your first language is). But it does give me two additional ideas that from a quick scroll downwards I don't think others have suggested: Language or culture. Language is unlikely but I do want to mention it as a possibility because I have a concrete example in English speakers learning Japanese: Implied subject. It's a common point of confusion with beginners that usually doesn't get a whole lot of explanation, other than "you have to infer it from the context" [0]. Maybe something similar is going on here, a piece of context that would be made more explicit in your first language that we usually skip or just imply in English? Culture is a possibility because I've seen it mentioned on here many times in the past, and I'm guessing if English isn't your first language and English speakers are confusing, you probably grew up in a (slightly?) different culture than you work in now, in addition to the language difference. I don't have good examples here, but what I remember is people talking about how people from some countries are very direct and in other countries that comes off as rude, and in the opposite direction the people trying to be polite sound like they're trying to avoid direct answers and it's hard to get them to say what they mean. That second one kind-of sounds like what you're describing here. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/japanese/comments/b8bae7/questions_about_implied_subject/ https://www.reddit.com/r/japanese/comments/b8bae7/questions_... Edit: Some people are posting links to culture-style differences further down: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33657314 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33657314

dcminter 4y ago
Early in my career I had an issue with some Indian colleagues who were using a little head wiggle that means "yes" or "go on" in that context, but to me at the time seemed more like a shrug or a "maybe". An observing colleague later explained to me - he said he enjoyed seeing me nod more and more vigorously and explaining my point in more and more detail as I unconsciously tried to elicit the expected "missing" nod of agreement/understanding from them... We live and learn.
- 4y ago