Small talk

Last updated
Simon Glucklich, Paar im Gesprach (Couple in Conversation) c. 1885 Simon Glucklich Paar im Gesprach.jpg
Simon Glücklich, Paar im Gespräch (Couple in Conversation) c. 1885

Small talk is an informal type of discourse that does not cover any functional topics of conversation or any transactions that need to be addressed. [1] In essence, it is polite and standard conversation about unimportant things. [2]

Contents

The phenomenon of small talk was initially studied in 1923 [3] by Bronisław Malinowski in his essay "The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages", [4] who coined the term "phatic communication" to describe it. [5] The ability to conduct small talk is a social skill.

Purpose

In spite of seeming to have little useful purpose, small talk is a bonding ritual and a strategy for managing interpersonal distance. [6] It serves many functions in helping to define the relationships between friends, colleagues, and new acquaintances. In particular, it helps new acquaintances to explore and categorize each other's social position. [7]

Small talk is closely related to the need for people to maintain a positive face and feel approved of by those who are listening to them. It lubricates social interactions in a very flexible way, but the desired function is often dependent on the point in the conversation at which the small talk occurs: [8]

  1. Conversation opener: when the speakers do not know each other, it allows them to show that they have friendly intentions and desire some sort of positive interaction. In a business meeting, it enables people to establish each other's reputation and level of expertise. If there is already a relationship between the two talkers, their small talk serves as a gentle introduction before engaging in more functional topics of conversation. It allows them to signal their own mood and to sense the mood of the other person.
  2. At the end of a conversation: suddenly ending an exchange may risk appearing to reject the other person. Small talk can be used to mitigate that rejection, affirm the relationship between the two people, and soften the parting.
  3. Space filler to avoid silence: in many cultures, silences between two people are usually considered uncomfortable and/or awkward. Tension can be reduced by starting phatic talk until a more substantial subject arises. Generally, humans find prolonged silence uncomfortable, and sometimes unbearable. That can be due to human evolutionary history as a social species, as in many other social animals, silence is a communicative sign of potential danger. [9]

In some conversations, there is no specific functional or informative element at all. The following example of small talk is between two colleagues who pass each other in a hallway:

William: Morning, Paul.
Paul: Oh, morning, William, how are you doing?
William: Fine, thanks. Have a good weekend.
Paul: Yes, thanks. Catch you later.
William: OK, see you.

In that example, the elements of phatic talk at the beginning and end of the conversation have merged. The entire short conversation is a space-filler. This type of discourse is often called chatter.

The need to use small talk depends upon the nature of the relationship between the people having the conversation. Couples in an intimate relationship can signal their level of closeness by a lack of small talk. They can comfortably accept silence in circumstances that would be uncomfortable for two people who were only casual friends. [10]

In workplace situations, small talk tends to occur mostly between workers on the same level, but it can be used by managers as a way of developing the working relationships with the staff who report to them. Bosses who ask their employees to work overtime may try to motivate them by using small talk to temporarily decrease their difference in status. [11]

The balance between functional conversation and small talk in the workplace depends on the context and is also influenced by the relative power of the two speakers. It is usually the superior who defines the conversation because they have the power to close the small talk and "get down to business." [12]

Topics

The topics of small talk conversations are generally less important than their social function. [13] The selected topic usually depends on any pre-existing relationship between the two people, and the circumstances of the conversation. In either case, someone initiating small talk will tend to choose a topic for which they can assume a shared background knowledge, to prevent the conversation from being too one-sided. [12]

Topics can be summarised as being either direct or indirect. [14] Direct topics include personal observations such as health or looks. Indirect topics refer to a situational context such as the latest news, or the conditions of the communicative situation. Some topics are considered to be "safe" in most circumstances, [8] such as the weather, [15] sports, and television. Asking about the weather when the weather lacks reason for a follow-up discussion may stall a conversation. [8]

Typically the level of detail offered avoids overstepping the bounds of interpersonal space. When asked "How are you?" by an acquaintance they do not know well, a person is likely to choose a simple, generalized reply such as "I am good, thank you." In this circumstance, it would usually not be appropriate for them to reply with a list of symptoms of any medical conditions they were suffering from. [12] To do so would assume a greater degree of familiarity between the two people than is actually the case, and this may create an uncomfortable situation.

Conversational patterns

A study of small talk in situations that involve the chance meeting of strangers has been carried out by Klaus Schneider. [16] He theorizes that such a conversation consists of a number of fairly predictable segments, or "moves". The first move is usually phrased so that it is easy for the other person to agree. It may be either a question or a statement of opinion with a tag question. For example, an opening line such as "Lovely weather, isn't it?" is a clear invitation for agreement. The second move is the other person's response. In functional conversations that address a particular topic, Grice's maxim of quantity suggests that responses should contain no more information than was explicitly asked for. [17] Schneider claims that one of the principles of small talk contradicts the maxim of quantity. He suggests that politeness in small talk is maximised by responding with a more substantial answer. Going back to the example of "Lovely weather, isn't it?", to respond factually by just saying "Yes" (or even "No") is less polite than saying, "Yes, very mild for the time of year". Schneider describes that subsequent moves may involve an acknowledgement such as "I see", a positive evaluation such as "That's nice", or what's called "idling behaviour", such as "Mmm", or "Really?".

Gender differences

Speech patterns between women tend to be more collaborative than those of men, and tend to support each other's involvement in the conversation. Topics for small talk are more likely to include compliments about some aspect of personal appearance. For example, "That dress really suits you." Small talk between women who are friends may also involve a greater degree of self disclosure. Topics may cover more personal aspects of their lives, their troubles, and their secrets. This self-disclosure both generates a closer relationship between them and is also a signal of that closeness. [18]

By contrast, men's small talk tends to be more competitive. It may feature verbal sparring matches, playful insults, and putdowns. [18] However, in a way these are also both creators and signals of solidarity; the men are signalling that they are comfortable enough with each other's company to be able to say these things without them being taken as insults.

Cultural differences

Small talk varies country to country and people to people. Southern Europeans, for example, are said to be very good at using lots of words to convey very little information. [15]

Also, small talk rules and topics can differ widely between cultures. Weather is a common topic in regions where the climate has great variation and can be unpredictable. Questions about the family are usual in some Asian and Arab countries. In cultures or contexts that are status-oriented, such as China, Latin America and Japan, [19] small talk between new acquaintances may feature exchange of questions that enable social categorization of each other.

Differences among members of various cultural groups in aspects of their attitudes to small talk and ways of dealing with small talk situations are considered to be rooted in their socioculturally ingrained perception of interpersonal relationships. [20] [21] [22] [23] In many European cultures it is common to discuss the weather, politics or the economy, although in some countries personal finance issues such as salary are considered taboo. [24] [25]

Finland and Sweden have been cited as countries where there is little culture of small talk and people are more comfortable with silence. [26] [27]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Functional linguistics</span> Approach to linguistics

Functional linguistics is an approach to the study of language characterized by taking systematically into account the speaker's and the hearer's side, and the communicative needs of the speaker and of the given language community. Linguistic functionalism spawned in the 1920s to 1930s from Ferdinand de Saussure's systematic structuralist approach to language (1916).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pragmatics</span> Branch of linguistics and semiotics relating context to meaning

In linguistics and related fields, pragmatics is the study of how context contributes to meaning. The field of study evaluates how human language is utilized in social interactions, as well as the relationship between the interpreter and the interpreted. Linguists who specialize in pragmatics are called pragmaticians. The field has been represented since 1986 by the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conversation</span> Interactive communication between two or more people

Conversation is interactive communication between two or more people. The development of conversational skills and etiquette is an important part of socialization. The development of conversational skills in a new language is a frequent focus of language teaching and learning. Conversation analysis is a branch of sociology which studies the structure and organization of human interaction, with a more specific focus on conversational interaction.

In linguistics, a phatic expression is a communication which primarily serves to establish or maintain social relationships. In other words, phatic expressions have mostly socio-pragmatic rather than denotational functions. They can be observed in everyday conversational exchanges, as in, for instance, exchanges of social pleasantries that do not seek or offer information of intrinsic value but rather signal willingness to observe conventional local expectations for politeness.

Communicative language teaching (CLT), or the communicative approach (CA) , is an approach to language teaching that emphasizes interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of study.

In semiotics, linguistics, anthropology, and philosophy of language, indexicality is the phenomenon of a sign pointing to some element in the context in which it occurs. A sign that signifies indexically is called an index or, in philosophy, an indexical.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social psychology (sociology)</span>

In sociology, social psychology studies the relationship between the individual and society. Although studying many of the same substantive topics as its counterpart in the field of psychology, sociological social psychology places relatively more emphasis on the influence of social structure and culture on individual outcomes, such as personality, behavior, and one's position in social hierarchies. Researchers broadly focus on higher levels of analysis, directing attention mainly to groups and the arrangement of relationships among people. This subfield of sociology is broadly recognized as having three major perspectives: Symbolic interactionism, social structure and personality, and structural social psychology.

The social penetration theory (SPT) proposes that as relationships develop, interpersonal communication moves from relatively shallow, non-intimate levels to deeper, more intimate ones. The theory was formulated by psychologists Irwin Altman of the University of Utah and Dalmas Taylor of the University of Delaware in 1973 to understand relationship development between individuals. Altman and Taylor noted that relationships "involve different levels of intimacy of exchange or degree of social penetration". SPT is known as an objective theory as opposed to an interpretive theory, meaning it is based on data drawn from actual experiments and not simply from conclusions based on individuals' specific experiences.

Communication accommodation theory (CAT) is a theory of communication developed by Howard Giles. This theory concerns "(1) the behavioral changes that people make to attune their communication to their partner, (2) the extent to which people perceive their partner as appropriately attuning to them." The basis of the theory lies in the idea that people adjust their style of speech to one another. Doing this helps the message sender gain approval from the receiver, increases efficiency in communication between both parties, and helps the sender maintain a positive social identity. This theory is concerned with the links between language, context, and identity. It focuses on both the intergroup and interpersonal factors that lead to accommodation, as well as the ways that power, macro- and micro-context concerns affect communication behaviors. Accommodation is usually considered to be between the message sender and the message receiver, but the communicator also often accommodates to a larger audience – either a group of people that are watching the interaction or society in general.

In semiotics, linguistics, sociology and anthropology, context refers to those objects or entities which surround a focal event, in these disciplines typically a communicative event, of some kind. Context is "a frame that surrounds the event and provides resources for its appropriate interpretation". It is thus a relative concept, only definable with respect to some focal event within a frame, not independently of that frame.

Research into the many possible relationships, intersections and tensions between language and gender is diverse. It crosses disciplinary boundaries, and, as a bare minimum, could be said to encompass work notionally housed within applied linguistics, linguistic anthropology, conversation analysis, cultural studies, feminist media studies, feminist psychology, gender studies, interactional sociolinguistics, linguistics, mediated stylistics, sociolinguistics, and feminist language reform and media studies.

In the social sciences, coordinated management of meaning (CMM) provides an understanding of how individuals create, coordinate and manage meanings in their process of communication. Generally, it refers to "how individuals establish rules for creating and interpreting the meaning and how those rules are enmeshed in a conversation where meaning is constantly being coordinated". "Human communication is viewed as a flexible, open and mutable process evolving in an ongoing joint interaction, which enables movement, shifts and evolving ways with each other". CMM embodies this vision and allows interpersonal connection and open conversation among individuals or groups, and can be applicable across multiple academic fields and social scenarios.

Predicted outcome value theory introduced in 1996 by Michael Sunnafrank, posits that people seek information in initial interactions and relationships to determine the benefits of interpersonal relationships by predicting the value of future outcomes whether negative or positive. If a person predicts a positive outcome in the relationship this can lead to increased attraction, however if a person predicts a negative outcome then he or she would pursue limited interaction or possibly relationship termination. The processes of predicted outcome value directly link to continued relationship development and communication as well as stronger attraction and intimacy within the relationship.

Research methodology based on intersubjective dialogue and an egalitarian relationship between the research team and those being researched .Current societies are characterized for using dialogue in different domains, seeing it as necessary for social progress and for avoiding different social conflicts. Critical communicative methodology is characterized for its dialogic orientation in different aspects of the research.

Contextualization in sociolinguistics refers to the use of language to signal relevant aspects of an interaction or communicative situation. This may include clues to who is talking, their relationship, where the conversation is occurring, and much more. These clues can be drawn from how the language is being used, what type of language is being used, and the participants tone of voice. Contextualization includes verbal and non-verbal clues of things such as the power dynamic or the situation apparent from a conversation being analyzed or participated in. These clues are referred to as "contextualization cues". Contextualization cues are both verbal and non-verbal signs that language speakers use and language listeners hear that give clues into relationships, the situation, and the environment of the conversation. An example of contextualization in academia is the work of Basil Bernstein. Bernstein describes the contextualization of scientific knowledge in pedagogical contexts, such as textbooks.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Interpersonal communication</span> Exchange of information among people

Interpersonal communication is an exchange of information between two or more people. It is also an area of research that seeks to understand how humans use verbal and nonverbal cues to accomplish a number of personal and relational goals.

The interaction hypothesis is a theory of second-language acquisition which states that the development of language proficiency is promoted by face-to-face interaction and communication. Its main focus is on the role of input, interaction, and output in second language acquisition. It posits that the level of language that a learner is exposed to must be such that the learner is able to comprehend it, and that a learner modifying their speech so as to make it comprehensible facilitates their ability to acquire the language in question. The idea existed in the 1980s, and has been reviewed and expanded upon by a number of other scholars but is usually credited to Michael Long.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Turn-taking</span> Type of organization in conversation and discourse

Turn-taking is a type of organization in conversation and discourse where participants speak one at a time in alternating turns. In practice, it involves processes for constructing contributions, responding to previous comments, and transitioning to a different speaker, using a variety of linguistic and non-linguistic cues.

Elderspeak is a specialized speech style used by younger adults with older adults, characterized by simpler vocabulary and sentence structure, filler words, content words, overly-endearing terms, closed-ended questions, using the collective "we", repetition, and speaking more slowly. Elderspeak stems from the stereotype that older people have reduced cognitive abilities, such as in language processing and production, and its use may be a result of or contribute to ageism. Although some aspects of elderspeak may be beneficial for some recipients, it is generally seen as inappropriate and a hindrance to intergenerational communication.

Social (pragmatic) communication disorder (SPCD), also known as pragmatic language impairment (PLI), is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by significant difficulties in the social use of verbal and nonverbal communication. Individuals with SPCD struggle to effectively engage in social interactions, interpret social cues, and use language appropriately in social contexts. This disorder can have a profound impact on an individual's ability to establish and maintain relationships, navigate social situations, and participate in academic and professional settings. Although SPCD shares similarities with other communication disorders, such as autism spectrum disorder (ASD), it is recognized as a distinct diagnostic category with its own set of diagnostic criteria and features.

References

  1. ↑ "dummies - Learning Made Easy". www.dummies.com. Retrieved 2021-12-19.
  2. ↑ "small-talk noun - Definition, pictures, pronunciation and usage notes | Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary at OxfordLearnersDictionaries.com". www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com. Retrieved 2019-12-27.
  3. ↑ Nield, David (7 July 2016). "Here's The Science Behind Why Small Talk Is So Awkward – And So Essential". ScienceAlert. Retrieved 2019-12-27.
  4. ↑ "The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages". The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages. Retrieved 2019-12-27.
  5. ↑ Malinowski, B. (1923) "The problem of meaning in primitive languages", in: Ogden, C. & Richards, I., The Meaning of Meaning, Routledge, London
  6. ↑ Bickmore, T. (1999) A Computational Model of Small Talk, accessed online at media.mit.edu
  7. ↑ Laver, J. (1975), "Communicative Functions of Phatic Communion", in: Kendon, A. / Harris, R. / Key, M. (eds.), The Organisation of Behaviour in Face-to-Face Interaction, pp.215–238, The Hague: Mouton.
  8. 1 2 3 Holmes, J. (2000) "Doing collegiality and keeping control at work: small talk in government departments", in: J. Coupland, (ed.) Small Talk, Pearson, Harlow UK.
  9. ↑ Joseph Jordania. "Times to fight and times to relax: Singing and humming at the beginning of Human evolutionary history". Kadmos 1, 2009: 272–277
  10. ↑ Jaworski, A. (2000) "Silence and small talk", in: J. Coupland, Small Talk, Pearson, Harlow UK.
  11. ↑ Holmes, J. (1998) "Don't Under-Rate Small Talk", New Zealand Business, 12,9.
  12. 1 2 3 Holmes, J. & Fillary, R. (2000) "Handling Small Talk at Work: challenges for workers with intellectual disabilities", International Journal of Disability 47,3.
  13. ↑ Tracy, K. & Naughton, J. M. (2000) "Institutional identity-work: a better lens", in: J. Coupland, Small Talk, Pearson, Harlow UK.
  14. ↑ Ventola, E. (1979) "The Structure of Casual Conversation in English", Journal of Pragmatics 3: pp.267–298.
  15. 1 2 George (2020-11-23). "Spanish Small Talk - London Translate English-Spanish Translation - Blog". London Translate. Retrieved 2020-11-27.
  16. ↑ Schneider, K. (1988) Small Talk: Analysing Phatic Discourse, PhD thesis, Philipps-Universität, Marburg, W. Germany.
  17. ↑ Grice, H. P. (1975) "Logic and Conversation", in: P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds.) Syntax and Semantics : Speech Acts, Vol.3, Academic, NY.
  18. 1 2 Tannen, D. (1992) "How men and women use language differently in their lives and in the classroom", The Education Digest 57,6.
  19. ↑ Hofstede, G. (2000) Culture's Consequences, revised edition, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  20. ↑ Cui, X. (2012, October 30). Communicating with Chinese colleagues, not just small talk. The Age.
  21. ↑ Cui, X. (2013, July 30). Tongue-tied. South China Morning Post, pp. A11
  22. ↑ Cui, X. (2012). ‘How are you? – Fine, thanks. How about you?’: A case of problematic social interaction at work between Chinese and Australians. In C. Gitsaki & R. B. Baldauf (Eds.), Future directions in applied linguistics: Local and global perspectives (pp. 373–389). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  23. ↑ Cui, X. (2014). Getting to the Source: An Instrument for Examining the Dynamics of Problematic Interactions. RELC Journal: A Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 45(2), 197–210.
  24. ↑ Grzega, J. (2006) EuroLinguistischer Parcours: Kernwissen europäischer Sprachkultur, Frankfurt (Main): IKO.
  25. ↑ Grzega, J. (2008) "Elements of Basic European Language Guide", Journal for EuroLinguistics 5: pp.118–133.
  26. ↑ Studarus, Laura (17 October 2018). "How the Finnish survive without small talk" . Retrieved 15 November 2019.
  27. ↑ Nilsson, Björn (13 October 2020). "How the Swedes survive without small talk" . Retrieved 13 October 2020.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.