4 ms·

Seems simple enough to me. The "No" is directed at defusing a redundant introductory lecture. Translate as: "No, you don't have to explain further, I complet

by mapt 12y ago

Seems simple enough to me. The "No" is directed at defusing a redundant introductory lecture. Translate as: "No, you don't have to explain further, I completely understand" "No, stop, I've already heard of that and I'm totally onboard with your opinion" I spend a lot of time being introduced to topics I'm already familiar with, but just nodding politely or saying "yeah" is interpreted as active listening, as "I'd like to hear more" rather than "Yeah, you can stop right there", which is too confrontational to use directly. What's your preferred way of expressing this sentiment, of interrupting someone in order to claim knowledge in their present topic, without indicating hostility or belittling them? Extending one of the other posts, "No, your assumption is incorrect, I am in fact already familiar with this subject and I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiment".

radiorental 12y ago
Exactly. I read it as an abbreviated 'no question' A twist on this is the Irish vernacular I grew up with where one repeats yes/no on a sharp intake of breath. Where I think breathing is some form of social cue for agreement. Pat: Shure didn't O'Duffy make a right clown of himself in the pub last night Mick: (breathing in) ehhYeah Yeah yeah, (nod head to one side and wink knowingly) no, he shure did.
hackaflocka 12y ago
The "no" might be short for "I know".
- bjt 12y ago
  From the article: > Or maybe—and this is the theory I like best, but can least substantiate—“No, totally” is really a contraction of “I know, totally.” That is linguistically improbable; I know of no instance in the English language where a homophonic slippage of this sort has taken place. But I like the theory anyway, because it captures what is often the semantic intent of “No, totally” with uncanny precision: I understand, and I am fully in accord.
  - bitJericho 12y ago
    When I say or read no, totally, I don't think "know" in my mind. I think above comments nailed it. It means "no question" or "no need to go on" to me.
- harperlee 12y ago
  As a counterexample, in spanish, we say "No, claro", and we don't have anything similar to "know".
  - hfsktr 12y ago
    saber/conocer? Unless I'm missing something?
    - jeorgun 12y ago
      The crucial point is that "yo sé" couldn't be shortened to "no", in the same way that "I know" can be shortened to "no" (via "I know" -> "know" -> "no").
jessriedel 12y ago
I think this is the correct explanation. Can someone find a counter-example where "no" is used in the weird way the New Yorker piece is describing, but where it can't be taken to mean "No, you don't have to go on; I know exactly what you're talking about/asking"? The example given by yathern... > A: I wasn't sure if you'd like to go to the park - do you want to? > B: No, totally! Definitely want to go. ...seems to fit.
- Alex3917 12y ago
  > Can someone find a counter-example where "no" is used in the weird way the New Yorker piece is describing I haven't listened to it, but I've heard that this goes into a bunch of different scenarios: http://www.slate.com/articles/podcasts/lexicon_valley/2013/06/yeah_no_lexicon_valley_slate_podcast.html http://www.slate.com/articles/podcasts/lexicon_valley/2013/0...
- jamesrom 12y ago
  Basically every time Tim Ferris talks on his podcast.

by mapt 12y ago

radiorental 12y ago

Exactly. I read it as an abbreviated 'no question' A twist on this is the Irish vernacular I grew up with where one repeats yes/no on a sharp intake of breath. Where I think breathing is some form of social cue for agreement. Pat: Shure didn't O'Duffy make a right clown of himself in the pub last night Mick: (breathing in) ehhYeah Yeah yeah, (nod head to one side and wink knowingly) no, he shure did.

hackaflocka 12y ago

The "no" might be short for "I know".

bjt 12y ago
From the article: > Or maybe—and this is the theory I like best, but can least substantiate—“No, totally” is really a contraction of “I know, totally.” That is linguistically improbable; I know of no instance in the English language where a homophonic slippage of this sort has taken place. But I like the theory anyway, because it captures what is often the semantic intent of “No, totally” with uncanny precision: I understand, and I am fully in accord.
- bitJericho 12y ago
  When I say or read no, totally, I don't think "know" in my mind. I think above comments nailed it. It means "no question" or "no need to go on" to me.
harperlee 12y ago
As a counterexample, in spanish, we say "No, claro", and we don't have anything similar to "know".
- hfsktr 12y ago
  saber/conocer? Unless I'm missing something?
  - jeorgun 12y ago
    The crucial point is that "yo sé" couldn't be shortened to "no", in the same way that "I know" can be shortened to "no" (via "I know" -> "know" -> "no").

jessriedel 12y ago

I think this is the correct explanation. Can someone find a counter-example where "no" is used in the weird way the New Yorker piece is describing, but where it can't be taken to mean "No, you don't have to go on; I know exactly what you're talking about/asking"? The example given by yathern... > A: I wasn't sure if you'd like to go to the park - do you want to? > B: No, totally! Definitely want to go. ...seems to fit.

Alex3917 12y ago
> Can someone find a counter-example where "no" is used in the weird way the New Yorker piece is describing I haven't listened to it, but I've heard that this goes into a bunch of different scenarios: http://www.slate.com/articles/podcasts/lexicon_valley/2013/06/yeah_no_lexicon_valley_slate_podcast.html http://www.slate.com/articles/podcasts/lexicon_valley/2013/0...
jamesrom 12y ago
Basically every time Tim Ferris talks on his podcast.