While reading chapters three and four I could not help but get a sense that using um and uh is a bad thing. That it is a mistake. These so called disfluencies supposedly disrupt the flow of our language. But is this really the case? Aren't these just useful mechanisms by which we can slow down and think about what we are saying; without accidentally giving the listener the impression that we are finished speaking? It seems to me that they help to keep the fluency of a sentence, while at the same time also allowing a pause to possibly eliminate verbal blunders. Blunders that could perhaps be caused by speaking faster than we can organize our thoughts.
A couple of the studies mentioned on pages 90 and 91 seem to support this positive perspective on um and uh. Page 90 mentions Pennebaker and Mehl's study in which they determined that people who used um and uh more were more conscientious, which by their definition meant more organized. I dont know about you but I would much rather talk to someone who is organized than someone who is all over the place. Mahl's study on page 91 suggests that all disfluencies other than um and uh correlate with anxiety. So those who used um and uh were more relaxed. And, again this seems, to me, to be a good thing. Still, I was confused because the author did not come out and clearly state the beneficial nature of um and uh. If any thing, from my understanding, he did the opposite.
So if uh and um can be so useful in our speech, then why is it that most of us view them as disfluencies or hindrances?
Comments (1)
Pete you bring up a really great point about uh and umms being a way to more organized in your speech. However, I think that there is a acceptable amount of these difluencies and unacceptable amount of them. When there are so many that it confuses or takes away from the context of the sentence then clearly you are not organized but just do not know what to say. However, if these disfluencies are placed appropriately and in a reasonable number they can help with organization of thought. It's just that sometimes there are so many umms and uhhs that the person themselves can forget what they are talking about in which case would loose the whole purpose of the disfluencies being helpful in organization.
Posted by Christina Sutphen | February 8, 2008 4:25 PM
Posted on February 8, 2008 16:25