The Big Power of Little Words

Most of us have lost respect for the dozens of little words we use every day. Some of these words we use (or hear) every hour. The effects of these little words can be wonderful or catastrophic, and sometimes, both at once. To be specific, I'm thinking about words like only, always, yet, and frankly. The power they have comes from the frequency with which we use them, and the way we use them. They've all taken on secondary meanings that can overpower their literal meaning. And that secondary meaning is the basis of the big power of these little words.

In a previous post, "Corrosive Buts," Point Lookout for July 9, 2003, I examined the effects of but, which often appears in debates about options teams have for addressing issues. The usual form is "<Statement1> but <Statement2> and <Bad-Implication>". In this form, using but tends to be interpreted as contradicting <Statement1>, which is rarely the intent. The (unwelcome) result is oppositional debate instead of joint problem solving. That's why it's often much safer to use and in place of but.

There are many more examples of the big power from little words. Here are three more.

Example 1: Yet

Consider yet. Literally, it can mean "up to now," as in, "I haven't yet heard any rumors about that." And it can also mean "in addition to" or "besides," as in, "Your behavior gives me yet another reason to wonder about your upbringing." That first meaning, up-to-now, is one that gives yet power to change how we think about ourselves and our potential.

Use this device: when you state something about yourself that's self-critical, add yet at the end. For example, compare "I'm not a people-oriented manager," to, "I'm not a people-oriented manager yet." The former is a statement that describes stasis. There is no thought of the potential for change, or for acquiring new abilities. The latter, on the other hand, emphasizes the potential for change and learning.

Big power from a little word.

Example 2: No way

When The effects of little words can be
wonderful or catastrophic,
and sometimes, both at oncea group is considering the value of one option (call it Option A) compared to other options, they likely exchange predictions of the respective results of the options. In this context, the phrase no way might make an appearance. Because so much of what we do is so complicated, predicting outcomes is notoriously difficult. To assert that there is "no way" a given outcome can result from Option A is to claim an ability to predict results that probably cannot be justified. What we really mean by "no way" is "improbable" or "unlikely."

Asserting that there is "no way" Option A can work is at best overstating the certainty of the claim. And it's an overstatement that distorts the debate, because it transforms into fact a mere claim that's often based on speculation, intuition, or anecdotes. We do better when we distinguish facts from speculations. Reserve "no way" for statements of fact, and provide evidence to justify your claim.

Example 3: Best

Just as with "no way," in the context of comparing options, the word best might arise. As an adjective, best is the superlative form of good. It literally means "excelling all others." We expose ourselves to risk when we use best to describe one option (call it Option A) of the several options under consideration. The risk is that it can distort the debate because it can prevent participants from recognizing the possible existence of as-yet-unmentioned options.

Suppose Option A truly is the best of the options under consideration. In that case, a term more accurate than best might be best of these. That phrase is more literally accurate because it doesn't imply that Option A is superior to options not under consideration. It leaves open the possibility that an option not yet considered might be superior to Option A. And that opening might lead the participants to search for alternatives.

But the effects of best are even more insidious. In many option-comparison discussions, what we mean by best — what we actually can justify — is "none better than." That is, Option A might be good, and it might be about as good as some other options. That's a much weaker claim than a claim that Option A is best. By using the term best we distort the conversation by implying that a detailed comparison of Option A to the other options would show Option A to be superior to all. And, very probably, that's a comparison we haven't done, don't have time to do, and don't have the resources to do.

Instead of best, try none better than once in a while. See how often that opens up the discussion.

Last words

The little words in the list below are like levers. They give us access to the mental shortcuts people use when they interpret statements that use these words. Those mental shortcuts help us interpret what we see and hear quickly. That speed comes at the price of accuracy. The leverage we gain by using these words gives us the ability to guide others to interpret what we're saying more quickly and less accurately.

Below is a list of examples of little words and phrases that can give their users big power.

• Absolutely not, no way, in your dreams
• Always, never
• Better, better not, had best, you'd best
• But
• Chill, calm down, cool your jets
• Frankly, honestly, to be honest/frank/candid
• Get
• If I were you
• Ignorant
• Look, listen
• No, can't, won't
• Only, just
• Pal
• Quotation marks
• Should
• Simply
• Upset
• You

And…any blue words.  Top    Next Issue

Are you fed up with tense, explosive meetings? Are you or a colleague the target of a bully? Destructive conflict can ruin organizations. But if we believe that all conflict is destructive, and that we can somehow eliminate conflict, or that conflict is an enemy of productivity, then we're in conflict with Conflict itself. Read 101 Tips for Managing Conflict to learn how to make peace with conflict and make it an organizational asset. Order Now!

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Effective Communication at Work:

Email Antics: IV

Nearly everyone I know complains that email is a real time waster. Yet much of the problem results from our own actions. Here's Part IV of a little catalog of things we do that help waste our time.

Interviewing the Willing: Tactics

When we need information from each other, even when the source is willing, we sometimes fail to expose critical facts. Here are some tactics for eliciting information from the willing.

Nasty Questions: I

Some of the questions we ask each other aren't intended to elicit information from the respondent. Rather, they're poorly disguised attacks intended to harm the respondent politically, and advance the questioner's political agenda. Here's part one a catalog of some favorite tactics.

Long-Loop Conversations: Clearing the Fog

In virtual or global teams, conversations can be long, painful affairs. Settling issues and clearing misunderstandings can take weeks instead of days, or days instead of hours. Here are some techniques that ease the way to mutual agreement and understanding.

Publish an Internal Newsletter

If you're responsible for an organizational effort with many stakeholders, communicating with them is important to success. Publishing an internal newsletter is a great way to keep them informed.

See also Effective Communication at Work and Effective Communication at Work for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming December 11: White Water Rafting as a Metaphor for Group Development

Tuckman's model of small group development, best known as "Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing," applies better to development of some groups than to others. We can use a metaphor to explore how the model applies to Storming in task-oriented work groups. Available here and by RSS on December 11.

And on December 18: Subgrouping and Conway's Law

When task-oriented work groups address complex tasks, they might form subgroups to address subtasks. The structure of the subgroups and the order in which they form depend on the structure of the group's task and the sequencing of the subtasks. Available here and by RSS on December 18.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info