That's Not What I Meant!: How Conversational Style Makes or Breaks Relationships

by Deborah Tannen

Each feels manipulated by the other, but they’re both just trying to get comfortable—and to do things right. This is analogous to what happens when two people who are standing and talking have different ideas about how close to stand when they talk. Both try instinctively to adjust the space between them to what is natural and comfortable, with the result that one keeps backing up and the other keeps advancing. They end up edging their way down the hall. Each one feels maneuvered by the other—and is. But neither consciously intends to force the other into anything. They’re both just trying to make the situation feel right. The danger—and inaccuracy—of a term like “manipulative” is that it blames others for the way we feel in response to them. The Uses of Indirectness Why can’t we just say what we mean? Why is so much communication indirect, hinted at in metamessages, picked up in tones of voice and glimpsed in facial expressions instead of confronted head on and clearly stated in words? First, there is a payoff in rapport. It is far better to get what we want, to be understood, without saying what we mean. It makes us feel the fine pleasure of being on the same wave length. This is the pleasure of those magical conversations when we say just a few words—or no words at all— and feel completely understood. It’s the communication jackpot, the pursuit of which makes us play the birthday-present and related do-you-love-me games. Second, there is a payoff in self-defense. If wha...