"But What Do You Mean?" by Deborah Tannen

Deborah Tannen in her article, “But What Do You Mean?” elucidates why men and women communicate badly. She expresses the reason of why the miscommunication occurs by identifying the conversational areas in which men and women have the most miscommunication: apologies, criticism, thank-yous, fighting, praise, complaints, and jokes. She further provides different scenarios in each category to show how “ many of the conversational rituals common among women are designed to take the other person’s feelings into account, while many of the conversational rituals common among men are designed to maintain the one-up position, or at least to avoid appearing one-down.” Therefore she further goes on to state that women are at a disadvantage because they are not trying to avoid the one-down position causing them to eventually end up there. She wants everyone to realize that there is no “right” way to talk but style differences can be blamed for when problem of communication arises. “If you want to get your message across, it’s not a question of being “right”; it’s a question of using language that’s shared-or at least understood.” When trying to get your point across, people need to change their language style so it suits the person they are talking to because it can lead to miscommunication if they do not.
Vocabulary:
Razzing: to tease or make fun of somebody
Tone:
Informal
Rhetorical terms:
Analogy: “…all styles will at times fail with others who don’t share or understand them, just as English won’t do you much good if you try to speak to someone who knows only French.” This analogy helped better the understanding of the whole passage.
Logical Appeal: “Adrenaline makes your mind sharper; you get ideas and insights you would not have thought of without the spur of battle.” This sense of logic helps the audience understand why people tend to fight.
Anecdote: A women who cowrote a report with a male colleague was hurt when she read a rough draft to him and he leapt into a critical response—‘Oh, that’s too dry! You have to make it snappier!’” The many anecdotes used by Tannen help the audience understand each are of miscommunication more clearly.
Rhetorical Question: “But had she really asked for his critique?” Rhetorical Questions helped the audience think about the subject and made them realize how miscommunication are created.
Imagery: “right between the eyes style.” This phrase helps people think about bull’s eye or like a target meaning straightforward. The imagery helps contribute to the meaning of the passage under criticism.
Discussion Questions:
Clarification: Is there just a difference between men and women or are their differences in the same gender?
Application: All people are different. So how are you able to tell how everyone’s language style is to avoid miscommunication?
Style: Does Tannen’s continual use of anecdotes help the reader connect to the article more closely or does it make the article less credible?