Mitt Romney’s “47 percent” comments have become a well-known example of how a person’s mouth can get him or her into trouble, especially in these days of cell-phone video and YouTube. The moral of the story is that people (you, me, and Mitt Romney) need to be aware that the demarcation between “private” and “public” has become increasingly fuzzy.
Even when people are being careful with their language and know that others will hear or read what they say, choice of words and manner of delivery may say more than was intended. In a recent column in the New York Times, for example, columnist David Brooks (#nytdavidbrooks) said that he has to write two columns a week for his readers. At the time, at least, he seemed to be finding his occupation a bothersome chore rather than a well-paying privilege. He could have said, “I am privileged to write,” or even simply, “I write.”
In saying, “I have to write,” Brooks reveals how he was feeling about his job as a columnist at the time he wrote that column. Language often suggests more about what we are thinking and feeling than we intend it to. My guess—and it is just a guess—is that Brooks may have been finding it more difficult to write these days because of the current state of U.S. politics. He is basically a conservative, and honest conservatives have not had an easy time defending current Republic political stances.
I am reasonably sure that Brooks knows he is among the privileged few (perhaps even in Romney’s 1 percent category) and that he has a cushy job of his choosing. He can probably look out his window and watch construction workers working on “high steel” riveting joints in the beams as winter winds blow. I suspect that he is glad that he’s not 30 (or more) stories up working on the steel beams. His use of “have to,” shows that regardless of what he knows consciously, something else—a belief—lurks below his level of conscious awareness.
This is true for everyone, of course. His “have to” is what in NLP is called a “modal operator of necessity.” Modal operators indicate the underlying attitude behind a statement. Perhaps the most important of these are modal operators of necessity and modal operators of possibility. Regardless of what we intend to say, our use of modal operators indicates how we really feel and what we really believe.
Necessity
- Can’t
- Won’t (will not)
- Must (must not)
- Have to
- Should (should not)
Possibility
- Can
- Will
- Get to
- Want to
- Would be glad to (would enjoy)
Language, even simple sentences, often reveals more about what people are thinking and feeling than they are aware. To learn more about what is beneath the surface meaning of language, pay special attention to the speaker’s use of modal operators and metaphors. In some ways, of course, a modal operator is a metaphor because the modal operator symbolizes an attitude.
When you read about today’s political scene or listen to news commentators, think about the implications of what is being said. What are the speakers really thinking? Is the speaker focused on need, lack, or losses implied by modal operators of necessity; or is he or she focused on the advantages, options, and benefits implied by modal operators of possibility.
What You Say Is What You Mean
Mitt Romney’s “47 percent” comments have become a well-known example of how a person’s mouth can get him or her into trouble, especially in these days of cell-phone video and YouTube. The moral of the story is that people (you, me, and Mitt Romney) need to be aware that the demarcation between “private” and “public” has become increasingly fuzzy.
Even when people are being careful with their language and know that others will hear or read what they say, choice of words and manner of delivery may say more than was intended. In a recent column in the New York Times, for example, columnist David Brooks (#nytdavidbrooks) said that he has to write two columns a week for his readers. At the time, at least, he seemed to be finding his occupation a bothersome chore rather than a well-paying privilege. He could have said, “I am privileged to write,” or even simply, “I write.”
In saying, “I have to write,” Brooks reveals how he was feeling about his job as a columnist at the time he wrote that column. Language often suggests more about what we are thinking and feeling than we intend it to. My guess—and it is just a guess—is that Brooks may have been finding it more difficult to write these days because of the current state of U.S. politics. He is basically a conservative, and honest conservatives have not had an easy time defending current Republic political stances.
I am reasonably sure that Brooks knows he is among the privileged few (perhaps even in Romney’s 1 percent category) and that he has a cushy job of his choosing. He can probably look out his window and watch construction workers working on “high steel” riveting joints in the beams as winter winds blow. I suspect that he is glad that he’s not 30 (or more) stories up working on the steel beams. His use of “have to,” shows that regardless of what he knows consciously, something else—a belief—lurks below his level of conscious awareness.
This is true for everyone, of course. His “have to” is what in NLP is called a “modal operator of necessity.” Modal operators indicate the underlying attitude behind a statement. Perhaps the most important of these are modal operators of necessity and modal operators of possibility. Regardless of what we intend to say, our use of modal operators indicates how we really feel and what we really believe.
Necessity
Possibility
Language, even simple sentences, often reveals more about what people are thinking and feeling than they are aware. To learn more about what is beneath the surface meaning of language, pay special attention to the speaker’s use of modal operators and metaphors. In some ways, of course, a modal operator is a metaphor because the modal operator symbolizes an attitude.
When you read about today’s political scene or listen to news commentators, think about the implications of what is being said. What are the speakers really thinking? Is the speaker focused on need, lack, or losses implied by modal operators of necessity; or is he or she focused on the advantages, options, and benefits implied by modal operators of possibility.