Miscommunication in language exchange is a common occurrence; we often inadvertently use some inappropriate words and expressions. If we are not careful, these word choices may bring us unnecessary trouble.
Firstly, avoid assuming personal opinions as self-evident truths. In discussions, if you consider your viewpoint unquestionable, you might unconsciously use words like “obviously,” “clearly,” or “undoubtedly.” This traps you in naive realism, where you believe objective facts are evident to everyone. However, reality is rarely completely objective and clear-cut, and rational individuals may have different perspectives, or they may require more substantial reasons to support your position. If you inadvertently appear to dismiss differing opinions as ignorant or worthless, it can seem dismissive, even offensive to others. If you have already clearly demonstrated your point, those words that emphasize clarity or certainty will only cause annoyance.
Secondly, avoid using exaggerated language. For example, when talking to someone whom you perceive as frequently annoying, you might involuntarily say “You always…” or “You never…”, which exaggerates and diminishes the credibility of your speech, spurring debates on frequency rather than the substance of the argument. The other person might refute with facts disproving your statement. If your real intent is to get someone to start or stop an action, focus on the action itself, not the frequency of the behavior.
Furthermore, don’t simply dictate what others should do. Directly telling people what to do inherently implies a value judgment. In some professional or culturally authoritative roles, it is indeed necessary to explicitly instruct what should or shouldn’t be done. However, in other contexts—especially when communicating with people other than subordinates—the word “should” fails to inspire compliance. When people prefer to make decisions autonomously, they are uncomfortable with the value judgment imposed by “should,” as if they couldn’t reach the right conclusions without such guidance. Expressions like “You might consider…”, “There is a possibility…”, or “Have you thought of doing this?” can relatively increase the influence of your speech.
Lastly, own your emotions instead of blaming them on others. It is natural to have an emotional reaction to someone’s behavior; this is a normal psychological response. However, attributing the cause of those emotions to others is counterproductive and may have the opposite effect.
Imagine, if you’re speaking and a colleague suddenly interrupts you, you could almost immediately feel a physical response—your face might turn red, and your heartbeat could quicken. In such a case, you might be eager to express your displeasure, saying, “Your interruption makes me very angry.” However, such direct expression could lead to an argument, as people generally do not want to be blamed for causing a particular behavior, especially when that behavior might harm others.
On the contrary, they tend to defend themselves, their words and actions, and even their intentions and personalities. In such situations, you can choose different approaches, such as: “Hey, you interrupted me, and I felt disrespected (or sad, angry). Please don’t do that next time, okay?” Or you could say: “Please let me finish, okay?” This way of speaking doesn’t involve describing personal feelings but focuses on the current topic of discussion.
Moreover, when dealing with others’ inappropriate behavior, it’s wise to avoid questioning their character. You might feel that someone’s behavior is “unprofessional”, “wrong”, or even “immoral”. But if you accuse them in this way, the accused person may become extremely defensive. People have a psychological need to believe that their behavior is honest and moral. If they feel that your words threaten their self-esteem, they are likely to defend their personality and overlook the essence of the issue.
Conversely, you can try to start a dialogue with more neutral language. For example, if someone misses a deadline, you could say: “Our project has been impacted,” instead of labeling and criticizing the person as “unprofessional.” Likewise, if someone manipulates data to make their department look better, you might suggest that this behavior “does not align with our core values” or “could damage the trust among us and our enthusiasm for learning,” rather than directly criticizing it as “wrong” or “immoral”.
Another common situation is when people (usually subconsciously) realize that something is personal to someone else, they might say “it’s not personal” or “don’t take this personally”. Take the movie You’ve Got Mail as an example, where such a conversation takes place between characters. The manager of a large chain bookstore tells the owner of a small independent bookstore that he plans to open a new store nearby, which will close her family bookstore, but it’s not out of personal animosity. Clearly, such speech is extremely personal to the affected party. Therefore, claiming “this is not a personal issue” in this scenario will only make the hurt party angrier.
If you truly care about the person and you know they take the matter personally, why not have the courage to acknowledge that? If not, it’s best to avoid discussing “personal vendettas”. Finally, regarding how to handle tricky conversations, people often advise “don’t make a mountain out of a molehill”, but unfortunately, this isn’t particularly helpful advice.
Even if you’re impeccably prepared in many ways, with strong core arguments, precise data support, practical solutions, and meticulous timing and planning, you might still find yourself drifting off course due to minor communication errors. Fortunately, it is entirely possible to correct these small oversights—the key is to be mindful and try to avoid using words and expressions that can lead to problems.
