I have just finished a month teaching gifted, ambitious high school students at a summer program run by the School of Communications at American University. It is always rewarding work. I teach two classes that focus on real-time verbal communications: Speaking for Impact and The Art of the Interview (students from that class are pictured here at WUSA-9). Students work hard in our sessions to improve, and one of the areas we concentrate on is awareness and elimination of verbal tics.
Here's a tic that seemed most prevalent this year: the over-use of "little words." Not your usual filler words, these—"just" and "so"—specifically diminish the power of statements they are attached to. As with many of these unconscious verbal tics, I first notice it with my kids, but soon become aware that it had seeped into adult communications. And like a few others ("upending?" "vocal fry"), this "just-and-so-itis" seems to disproportionately effect female speakers. I am not the only one to have noticed this trend. Check out this article from Business Insider, in which author Ellen Petry Leanse observes that the over-use of "just" by women can dilute the power of their message. I agree. "Just" should be used judiciously, correctly, and never as an un- or sub- consciously apologetic or permission-seeking word.
As for "so:" one day 90% of the girls in my classes used it to preface many of their sentences. Only one of the boys did. Over the course of a month, I heard several speeches at the podium beginning with "so," (often paired with its good friend "OK"), and several interview questions started that way as well. That usage might be appropriate if—and only if—you are sitting in the guest chair being interviewed in a very informal setting. But when you use it to begin a speech, or before you give context or ask your question, it gives the impression that you need some kind of springboard to launch into what you have to say, which signals that you may be ill at ease. Or unprepared. Speakers might think this humanizes them (whatever that means!), but it really draws attention to their nervousness and speaker anxiety.
I am also seeing a lot of "so"s used to begin written communications from professional women who should know better! These are most often in e-mail messages and social media posts, but wherever they are, they weaken the message. It's as if the writer has some need to "back in" to the conversation, fears she does not have enough standing to simply begin. I know the women who do this would never consciously characterize their communications style this way. So why do they do it? Are they trying to be coy in order to soften a statement? Playing some kind of passive role so they can turn the tables later? Or are they simply unaware? Whatever the reason, they are not doing themselves any favors.
As I told my students, sometimes we should sweat the small stuff. Or at least be aware of the little words.
As for "so:" one day 90% of the girls in my classes used it to preface many of their sentences. Only one of the boys did. Over the course of a month, I heard several speeches at the podium beginning with "so," (often paired with its good friend "OK"), and several interview questions started that way as well. That usage might be appropriate if—and only if—you are sitting in the guest chair being interviewed in a very informal setting. But when you use it to begin a speech, or before you give context or ask your question, it gives the impression that you need some kind of springboard to launch into what you have to say, which signals that you may be ill at ease. Or unprepared. Speakers might think this humanizes them (whatever that means!), but it really draws attention to their nervousness and speaker anxiety.
I am also seeing a lot of "so"s used to begin written communications from professional women who should know better! These are most often in e-mail messages and social media posts, but wherever they are, they weaken the message. It's as if the writer has some need to "back in" to the conversation, fears she does not have enough standing to simply begin. I know the women who do this would never consciously characterize their communications style this way. So why do they do it? Are they trying to be coy in order to soften a statement? Playing some kind of passive role so they can turn the tables later? Or are they simply unaware? Whatever the reason, they are not doing themselves any favors.
As I told my students, sometimes we should sweat the small stuff. Or at least be aware of the little words.
