BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication

Subject: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: GUEST,MMario
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 01:33 PM

This question arose due to a topic in another forum - and I seem to be in a distinct minority in my reaction.

situation: a person walks up to another and greets them. The response is non-verbal.

QUESTION - leaving aside *what* the non-verbal response is - is it RUDE to not VERBALLY return a greeting?


Now - to understand where I am coming from - I grew up in a town where an effusive greeting could easily be the lifting of a single finger from the steering wheel as you drove by a close friend on the other side of the street. Or a slight lift of the head from across the room. (and I'm talking any size room up to a gymnasium here) Sometimes a greeting was verbal on both sides. Sometimes it was non-verbal on both sides. it could be mixed in either direction as far as intial greeting and response - and no one considered it to be rude to use non-verbal signals.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Pseudolus
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 01:38 PM

I guess it depends on which finger you use.....

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: GUEST,MMario
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 01:47 PM

seriously - I specified regardless of content...

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Tinker
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 01:57 PM

The verbal content to me is much less important than the eye contact and acknowledgement. Words lie much easier than non-verbal signals. But that's just my opinion put into words.

Tinker

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Chief Chaos
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 02:02 PM

Down here in Louisiana quite often the response is non-verbal. Usually in the case of a male/female interaction it will be the male who verbally greets the female, the female reciprocates with arms open wide for a hug, and then further verbal non-verbal communication takes place. Some seriously nice and loving people down here.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Amos
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 02:18 PM

It is not rude unless you are in a group (class, community, culture) that sets that agreement (acknowledgement must be verbal) up. Essentially, acknowledging a communication can be done any way that gets across as long as the person knows they've been acknowledged. The thing that is rude, whatever the vocabulary of signals used may be, is not acknowledging a communication, leaving the person wondering whether they are being not heard, snubbed, or dismissed in some way.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Allan C.
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 02:28 PM

I think one of the oddest responses to a verbal greeting is (and this is almost exclusive to males,) the sudden backward jerk of the recipient's head as though he had been physically stricken by the greeting. I suppose this is a modification of the affirmative lifting of the head to signify much the same thing. I just think it is odd.

Having lived in a broad variety of social environments, I would have to say that responses must be geared to the local norm. If a casual nod or (index) finger-flick is generally accepted; do it. If local folks attempt to recreate a scene from the writings of Joel Chandler Harris unless you say something aloud; speak.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 02:59 PM

If I made it a point to walk up to a specific person, look them in the eye, and greet them verbally, I would expect some kind of acknowledgement, preferably verbal and/or by gesture. As Amos pointed out, it's when someone just doesn't respond at all that is rude.

Perhaps present company excepted, it seems that men in general do more of a non-verbal, or monosyllabic greeting which leaves one to wonder if they've been heard at all. Maybe this is just a phenomenon of couples and they're just doing the Tim Allen "yes, dear" grunt to the "Honey dews.":-)

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Red and White Rabbit
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 03:36 PM

Hi the definition of communication is that it is an agreed system between two or more parties. Different cultures have different systems of communication and you need to know each parties system to decide if lack of verbal responses etc. is rude or not. I found it really hard to get use to my asian friendsnever looking at me when they talk to me but it is a mark of respect not to look into someones eyes in their culture.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Folkiedave
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 03:45 PM

I used to do an exercise in a classroom where one person had a map of Paris and directed the rest of the group from one spot to another using maps.

The ensuing melee demonstrated the concept of a system of communication better than all the lectures in the world. (They also had different maps, the person directing had simple one, those receiviing directions had a more complicated on) Red and White Rabbit is spot o0n in this regard.

Regards,

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Homeless
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 03:47 PM

I don't think that your hypothesized situation is specific enough.
a person walks up to another and greets them. The response is non-verbal.
Walks up to stand face to face? Greets as if to open a conversation? Or just just says hello as they walk past? Co-worker, friend, aquaintance, stranger?

If I were to pass a stranger who greeted me, I might respond with just a nod. If a co-worker came up to my desk and appeared to have a question, I'd respond with just the quirk of an eyebrow. A friend I would throw a smile to when passing by, but would greet verbally if we were stopped.

I think in answer to the spirit of your question, a non-verbal response is not necessarily rude, but may be in certain circumstances.
A lot depends upon the perception of the receiver of the message.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: GUEST,MMario
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 03:58 PM

and there of course you get into another conundrum - as far as I can figure out - "rudeness" surely has to be a matter of INTENT - though action or inaction can per percieved as rude - can it actually be rude without the intention?

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 03:58 PM

That's what I was thinking, Homeless. It needs to be more specific.

Good point, Red&White Rabbit...many Native American cultures consider eye-contact to be taboo/rude.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: GUEST,MMario
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 04:04 PM

sorry - I kept it kinda general because of what and where I first beggered the question...

The general consensus there seemed to be that to not respond verbally to a verbal greeting was extremely rude. period. end of discussion. (despite the fact that the particular occasion they were discussing they didn't actually know whether or not the person receiving the greeting had heard or understood the greeting.)

I agree that as I posed the question it is a big "it depends" -

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Rasener
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 05:01 PM

I think you also have to take into account certain medical issues.

My duaghter woudn't look people in the eye because she is Autistic. Very often, she will not respond to voice becuase if she is in the middle of doing something, she can only deal with that one task. Effectively it is difficult for her to multi task.

Having said that, if I greet somebody verbally, I expect a response. If not I assume they either don't want to talk to me or are being rude.

I generally say hello to people I am greeting and smile and offer my hand. I cannot remember a time when that hasn't been acknowledged, with the same response.

I guess it depends on how you deal with it yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Kim C
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 05:54 PM

I work in an office building where people continally pass each other in the hallway, on the stairs, in the parking lot... usually a quick Hi or a smile/nod is all there's time for. I think the acknowledgement is important, and I don't think someone's rude if they don't actually speak.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 07:39 PM

MMario, you said:

and there of course you get into another conundrum - as far as I can figure out - "rudeness" surely has to be a matter of INTENT - though action or inaction can per percieved as rude - can it actually be rude without the intention?

To paraphrase a famous former President of the United States, "Depends what the meaning of 'is' is."

If it's intended as rude, it is rude, no question about it.   Even if the recipient doesn't take offense.   

But even if it's not intended to be rude, it may be rude if, for example, the act or comment shows a disregard of the feelings or rights of the recipient.

And obviously, if there is no intent to be rude and the recipient receives it in the same spirit, there's no problem and no rudeness.

So I conclude that rudeness may be a matter of either intent or carelessness, negligence, or the like.


Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 07:43 PM

Actually folkiedave,
it's even more pointed if the two parties have maps of different towns...

Robin

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Allan C.
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 07:59 PM

Intent be damned! It really doesn't matter whether someone intends to be rude. It could still miss the mark. All that matters is how the message is received. This is true even if the action or inaction is unintentional. If the other person perceives a slight, then for all practical purposes there is one.

Just as a parallel of sorts, try putting this in the legal context of sexual harassment. The (US) law states that it is deemed to have occurred if the complaintent perceives that it did. Quite a sticky wicket, that.

But getting back to the communication question, the real can of worms is in just how much responsibility you should accept for how another person receives your actions/inactions.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Allan C.
Date: 26 Feb 04 - 08:15 PM

complainant

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Sam L
Date: 27 Feb 04 - 10:12 AM

This is pretty interesting. I've been writing an ersatz manners column from a male perspective. So far only my wife thinks it's funny.

I don't think a non-verbal greeting is rude. What I think is rude is people not considering the point of view, or possible situations of another person, and taking offense at everything that can be construed as a slight. It's rude to expect manners to mean that the world should busily attend to one's insecurities and neediness. I very often hear people saying Don't you think this person is unpleasant? Aren't they snobby? when it had never occurred to me that way. No, that person seems shy, the other seems preoccupied.

   If you've ever had a sore throat you may recall having to explain that it hurts to talk, all day, and how many people like to ask you many questions about it.

   I'm an advocate of the non-verbal. Some people manage to block an aisle with themselves and their cart, and want you to ask them to please move it. I simply don't put it in everyone's way in the first place, and try to be aware of people around me. I'm looking for groceries, not pleasantries. People who don't take non-verbal cues are sometimes revealing an intention of their own--a desire to be offended, to be in the way--unless they're impaired, because visual cues are often actually clearer and quicker. Tell someone to listen to what you say. Say "touch your hand to your cheek" while you touch your own hand to your chin. See which they "hear."

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Bill D
Date: 27 Feb 04 - 06:48 PM

".. is it RUDE to not VERBALLY return a greeting?"

unh unh

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Rasener
Date: 27 Feb 04 - 08:04 PM

In the normal sense yes.

If the other person does not like you and you know that, I think not.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Feb 04 - 08:16 PM

Good grief.   There really are people who get affronted because they get a nod or a wave or a thumbs up or a touch of the cap or whatever, instead of a spoken response? And who expect everyone else to fall in with their hang ups or be taken as being guilty of discourtesy, whatever the actual or obvious intent?

Spare me such people.

As for Allen C finding something odd about a nod which starts with an upward movement of the head, but nothing odd about one that starts with a downward movement, that distinction seems pretty odd to me. Imagine making the same distinction when it came to people shaking their head, according to whether the gesture started with a left turn or a right return. (I've just tried that, and I think that an initial right turn is my normal preference.)

I work on the principle that unless someone indicates pretty unmistakably that they are feeling hostile towards me, anything they do is to be construed as friendly. (And even if they are hostile, a friendly greeting is a much better way of getting under their skin than a counter-hostile one.)

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 27 Feb 04 - 08:28 PM

Mc Grath,

My next door neighbour is strange - she exhibits many external behaviours which have caused me and my friends to wonder that she may be exhibiting symptoms of a sort of delusional paranoid schizophrenia - any attempt to be friendly results in a random response - sometimes, even in the same breath - of social pleasantries and hostile abuse - a smile sets her off even worse - I now just pretend that she does not exist and that she is just a disembodied voice that I ignore.

Science has shown that some individuals have a wrongly wired lower part of the brain that connects emotions and thoughts.

if you think I am harsh, when I was friendly towards her, she was placing weekly complaints to the council about how my property was overrun with rats, grass too long, rubbish, etc. Finally got the council off my back by pointing out that since they refused to disclose who was making the nuisance harassing complaints, that meant under Aussie Law that they were conspiring with someone unknown to me to harass me and I could sue the council directly for conspiracy to harass. Conspiracy is a nasty charge in Aus... and it only has to be demonstrated that the actions are producing the result, not necessary to demonstrate any intent to conspire or even harass.

And now I insist that the Council mows the footpath - as a remberance! :_0

Robin

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Feb 04 - 08:42 PM

So some people are a bit screwed up. Surely that means that they can't really count as unfriendly, even if they act that way. If ignoring the lady makes it easier living alongside her, fair enough, but that's not an unfriendly response either, it's just a reasonable way of minimising problems.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 27 Feb 04 - 08:51 PM

I posted some stuff relevant to this in the 'Where do you draw the line?' thread.

I don't want to go on about her - I could fill pages... :-) but somehow - in her - what passes for a - mind, it's all my fault! She was getting out the police regularly when the wind would blow down things in her yard that she had not put up securely - and somehow that was supposed to be my fault... aggh!

Robin

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: LadyJean
Date: 28 Feb 04 - 12:48 AM

Since I got my driver's license six years ago, I've become something of an expert at the non verbal communication of the road. The gesture that means I know you've got the right of way, and I'm letting you have it. The one that means thanks. I smile sweetly, behind my windsheild, and say "It's called a turn signal you moron."
or "That sign said stop, cretin."

If I meet a man whose behavior is iffy, I will be very unpleasant with him. I have my definition of iffy. (The guy who grabbed the hem of my skirt as I was crossing the sixth street bridge comes to mind.) Another woman might perceive a friendly smile as iffy, or a pleasant hello. Her experience may be different from mine.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 28 Feb 04 - 04:21 PM

Unfortunately I was grought up pretty well much in teh female world - tend to understand most of those 'female' signals... :-)

Robin

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Feb 04 - 12:23 PM

A military salute is a non verbal communication, so is a friendly wave of the hand. In some cultures the thumbs up sign is offensive, so be carefull how you gesticulate. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Feb 04 - 04:31 PM

Thumbs up is an interesting one - movies about the Romans always get it the wrong way round. "Thumbs up", in the context of the arena meant "Go on and kill him!", "Thumbs down" meant "Let him live!"

And I gather that in Iraq, for example, it means "up yours", which could mean that occupying soldiers may at times take the locals to be a lot happier with their presence than is actually the case.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Mr Red
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 09:22 AM

I frequently smile, nod, and maybe say hello. Especially when I was working at a large company. Some people do not want that contact. I never felt slighted if the response was "private". I would say it depends on how well you know the person, sometime it works, sometimes not.

I guess if one is looking for acknowledgement of self worth it can be a bigger blow to that if we interpret it as "not the freshest flavour in town". If one is comfortable with one's warty personna then it does find a happier balance. Heaven knows I have been low enough for it to matter in the past.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Chief Chaos
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 11:11 AM

A salute in the military is supposed to be followed with a verbal greeting to the superior officer. It is up to that officer to decide whether or not to return the greeting verbally. If they do so cheerfully the lower folk think "what a great guy". If it is done flat or grumpily the lower folk think "at least he's trying". If the salute is returned but not the greeting the lower folk think "best to avoid this one if possible". If the salute is not even returned the lower folk think "what an asshole".

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 08:09 AM

Chief Chaos, There is no requirement for verbal exchange in passing; but the salute is a mark of respect and is mandatory.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Homeless
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 09:05 AM

a mark of respect and is mandatory
Boy, now there's a concept that is really FUBAR. If it's mandatory, that means you'd have to give one whether you respect the person or not. Seems to me like it's more of a mark of ass kissing.

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 09:18 AM

Respect the position of authority, not the arsehole in it...

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 10:58 AM

Chief Chaos said:

A salute in the military is supposed to be followed with a verbal greeting to the superior officer.

Of course I know not what country's military you speak of, Chief.
But in my two-year period of involuntary servitude in the US Army, while the salute was mandatory, there was no requirement of a verbal greeting.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Verbal/Non-verbal communication
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 01:39 PM

It's a long time since I was a cadet, but my impression at that time was that making a verbal greeting to a superior officer, unless they'd made one first, would be seen as a breach of discipine. Saluting an officer, on the other hand, was mandatory. (I'm not sure about returning a salute, but it seemed normal practice.)

So with the non-verbal greeting, the junior person initiated it, but with the verbal communication, the superior person would do so.