What can be said about a person's character by his manner of speaking

10.11.2024/19/00 XNUMX:XNUMX    107

How to determine the temperament of a new acquaintance, if you have communicated for no more than a minute? It's easy to assess his manner of speaking by listening to the characteristic turns of language that stand out from the general style. And to make it easier for you to understand who you are dealing with, we suggest you focus on the following parameters. Language can tell a lot about a person's character.

Too many input constructs

"In short", "so to speak", "perhaps", "by the way", "means". Too many such insertions in a sentence betray an emotionally unstable nature with a choleric temperament. At the same time, the number of introductory words can hide a banal feeling of insecurity in the presence of a significant person, or even worse - a lack of vocabulary caused by short-sighted intelligence.

Too many diminutive suffixes

If a person prefers to reduce everything in the world to "musi-pusi", most likely, he is stuck at the level of development of a child. "Toffee", "sandwich", "pupsik", "candy", etc. In this way, adults artificially underestimate their level of maturity in order to evoke sympathy from others and get indulgences. The other side of this habit is conscious flirting with the environment to secure one's environment.

The habit of speaking in stingy phrases

Sharp abrupt speech is a sign of a technically minded person who prefers to speak briefly, clearly and to the point. Such people do not like to let dust into their eyes. They prefer simplicity and openness in relationships. They strive to be understood, value other people's time. They are difficult to derail. They know how to put a problem on the shelves and quickly convey its essence to the audience.

Latest news:  Inner chaos: ways to help defeat it

Abuse of the pronoun "I"

"And I think so and so", "I want this too", "I always do this", "now I will speak" and other statements about oneself, which a person inserts not always into the story, trying to come to the fore. What does this say? About egocentrism and unconscious confidence of a person that he is better, more interesting and more important than others. Such a trait betrays low self-esteem, which the interlocutor tries to compensate by pulling the blanket over himself.

Mention of oneself in the third person




"Anya had breakfast", "Mikhail needs rest", "Roma dreams of such a girl!" - people say about themselves. Basically, this technique is used for self-irony, carrying a purely entertaining function. But sometimes a person flirts and turns it into a habit, which indicates excessive eccentricity of the character and the desire to be the center of attention, like a capricious child.

Using derogatory nicknames

This category includes not only frankly negative nicknames such as "tough-minded", "unhealthy" or "old maid", but also a humiliatingly gentle form of dominance - "dear", "my fish", "dear" - in relation to strangers or subordinates . What does this habit mean? About the hidden desire to control the environment, to impose the game according to one's own rules and to assert oneself at someone else's expense. As you can see, not the best qualities...

Latest news:  When is the winter solstice in 2024: how to attract success and luck on this day

Sound imitation

"Brr", "babe", "vzhuh", "uh", "clap". Such insertions make a person's speech alive, bright and effective. But if they are overdone, replacing all other words, this indicates a poor vocabulary or a banal unwillingness to strain, looking for the right metaphor to express feelings. Such people either have no imagination, or their emotions run ahead of their thoughts, which is why it turns out to be a mess. In life, they do first, and then think.

Attack with counter questions

There are such individuals with whom it is impossible to communicate. You ask the topic, but they seize the initiative with a counter question. "How do you like the weather? "And you?" "Bad mood? - Where did you get it from? "Would you like some candy? "Are you kidding me?" Dialogue with them resembles an interrogation, where you are always under the gun. This manner of speaking is characteristic of critics and cynics who are not used to trusting people and are afraid of losing control over the situation. Confronting questions help them maintain power and not lose face if they are put in an uncomfortable position.

Fast, as if unfinished speech

If your interlocutor talks about something without thinking, while his thought does not come to the final point, but is overgrown with new ideas and discoveries, then you are an intellectual or an inveterate debater. Such people love to think on the go and do not particularly consider the interests of others. Maybe that's why they have so few friends? If at the same time a person speaks very quickly and swallows part of the words, he does not seek to find understanding in the environment, because he is used to being a "white crow".

Latest news:  I don't throw away the foil after use, but rub the pans with it: a new life for dishes

Pseudo intellectual words

Instead of conveying their opinion in a simple and understandable language, pseudo-intellectuals operate with complex professional terminology in which they may not understand a thing. For example, they replace psychological violence with "gaslighting," and duplicity with "ambivalence." Such a desire to show off suggests that you are not mature enough, who tends to overestimate his abilities, trying to appear more than he is.

Use of stationery

Ever come across people who talk like they're reading a bureaucratic pamphlet? "I'm in a state of extreme exhaustion" instead of just "tired". "Committed the act of consuming food" instead of "ate". "Raid a messenger to a friend" instead of "helped a friend". Not only is such an accumulation of words not used in oral speech, it also sounds unnatural. A similar style is characteristic of posers who want to add significance to themselves. Or to short-sighted people who consider such a manner a sign of high artistic style. Unfortunately, both of them are wrong.