 |
Dear Gavin-An Analysis
| Now that you have finished this chapter, read the letter to Gavin again and see if you can find some of the techniques of indirect communication discussed in these pages; then read the analysis below.
|
|
Paragraph 3- When the landlord says "Yes. If you like" to Jan's inquiry about using the attic, he is probably saying no. Yes, as you have seen, means little in some cultures, and a qualified yes (if you like) is even more problematic. The landlord next launches into a story about the advantages of owning little, which may be his polite way of saying that he won't be able to store Jan's many possessions in his attic. This fact becomes abundantly clear when we get to paragraph #6.
|
|
Paragraph 4- Indirect communicators often change the subject rather than disagree with or say no to someone, which may be why the landlord answers Jan's question about meals with a comeback about the convenient location of the house.
|
|
Paragraph 5- The landlord's reply to Jan's offer of 200, "That's good, don't you think?" is mere politeness. If he were pleased with 200, he would probably have been much more positive. Any doubt is erased when he then asks her if she thinks 200 is enough; if he thought it was enough, he wouldn't have asked. She interprets his question as a real question, when it is in fact a way of expressing disagreement or disapproval. When he then goes back to the matter, asking her if she's happy with the price, he is signaling that he is not happy with it, but she still doesn't understand.
|
|
Paragraph 6-Now we get the answer to the inquiry about using the attic. Since she thought he gave permission (Yes. If you like) but he did not, he has to come back to the matter to clarify it. He's not going to say no, but he gives enough hints, and then brings up the price again.
|
To summarize, these are techniques of indirect communication illustrated here:
1. Using a qualified yes to mean no.
2. Telling a story as a way of saying no delicately.
3. Changing the subject to avoid saying no.
4. Asking a question to give a negative answer.
5. Returning to a previous point of discussion to signal disagreement.
|
|
|
|
