Comment by ggm | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ggm | Hacker News Reader

Serial Offender, fallen off the wagon many times over the decades.

I've seen some amazing pushback. A researcher who bellowed "I HAVE NOT FINISHED" so loud, it was like the MTV man-in-a-chair reaction from everyone else. I wasn't the guilty party that time but I could have been.

It's often said people believe women do most interrupting when the stats are very good 75% or more in mixed dialogue, is men's speaking time. (or used to be. maybe there's been a shift but I doubt it)

I do think its a combination of things. Well meaning engagement/reflection signals, "me-too" and also the tangents being struck, fleeting moments in the interupters stack of ideas. But also dominance asserting.

As an offendor, I don't mean to minimise the impact it has. I know it's not good. But I want to interrupt and intrude another one I can't handle:

"correct"

If you say this to me as I speak, you're dead to me. You aren't the arbiter of right and wrong, you aren't the teacher, you aren't the prover. If you want to assert agreement, find another way.

RE: "correct"

In some Asian vernacular Englishes (e.g. Indian, Singaporean), this is means "yes, right" / "I agree". I used to experience your reaction to people saying "correct" to me while I talk (i.e. "fuck you") but since then, my understanding has increased, and I interpret it to mean "yes, right" / "I agree".

Additionally, it may be that people who say this aren't native speakers of an Asian vernacular English, but are accommodated (i.e. Linguistic Accommodation) to it and so reproduce it in other contexts (e.g. in conversations with you).

I hope you found this illuminating.

I did. That was very insightful and interesting. It's a fellow anglo who is the serial offendor. I never push back on ESL, My wife taught TEFL and I have been acculturated to a high tolerance for any minor nit in an ESL speaker.

But fellow Anglo.. I have low to zero tolerance for this particular verbal tic.

I hadn't considered the english diaspora/vernacular. I'll have to be mindful of that.

Non-native speaker here. Don't "correct" and "right" have the same meaning? Do most American/European native speakers feel so strongly about using "correct" in a conversation to show agreement?

correct can come of pretensions

that’s right is more friendly

They have the same literal meaning, but "correct" is generally a pretty hard assertion of, well, correctness - If you say something, and someone else says "correct" in response, it can come across as demeaning, as if they are passing judgement on what you've said and found it sufficient (as elaborated on in the grandparent - the feeling is "what right do you have to decide the correctness of my comment?"). What if they were wrong, would you have said "incorrect"?

In comparison, saying something like "right", "yes", are acknowledgements that don't carry the same weight when it comes to judging the actual content of what someone has said.

Writing it out makes it sound like a strange response, but these things aren't always sensible. I would suspect it has roots in the typical contexts where you'll see "correct" being used - eg. tests and the like, where someone with authority (eg teacher/professor) is typically deciding on whether you're correct, as opposed to say, work, where generally these will be conversations between equals.

It depends a lot on tone and body language, but "right" usually means "I agree with you" while "correct" can come off as them deigning to give their approval from a high place, like "I'm the one who actually has the knowledge, but you happen to be correct in this specific instance". But it's more about the person and their tone, the people who feel strongly about this are probably who have experienced it from someone insufferable who uses it as a power play. I.e. if you're not intentionally using it this way, you don't have much to worry about.

Thinking about how people use the words. I think "right" or "thats right" is a declaration of belief in correctness, but "correct" includes "marking" people, or declaring as the adjudicator something is right or wrong. "I agree" is the more mutual expression.

If we had "rightness" in more common use, as an act of adjudication, akin to marking homework (which is either correct or incorrect?) then the distinction might be smaller. It is a fine distinction, and I can see for vernacular english this may be a lost battle: indeed who am I to say this is "incorrect" usage of English in the Indian, or Singaporean, or even American community?

Correct is unfortunate because of its dual use: both to signal agreement, and to confer aprobation on something, as when Teachers reward pupils. "Thats Correct Harry, 5 points to Gryffindor"

English isn't alone in these problems: A spanish speaker went to some lengths to explain distiction between Amor and Quero to me. You wouldn't use one with your sister, when you would with your girlfriend.

My attempt to explain:

Words have definitions. But also have connotations - a secondary meaning/implication/feeling. Connotations usually come from where these words are often used. Like formal vs informal speaking. Pub language is not often used during a pitch at a board meeting.

The word "Correct" is usually used by teachers or authority figures to judge the work of their students or subordinates. "Correct" works if the other person is contractually obliged to supply you with something to meet parameters.

The word "Right" (applied to validation) is more casually used by most everyone talking to their peers.

But many conversations are educational/clarifying and entered into by both parties voluntarily. In this context, "Correct" can seem an awful lot like they are trying to elevate themselves to be your superior or teacher, thus demeaning you to student/subordinate level. And so, many will opt to simply abort such a conversation if they don't have to continue.

For my part though, while this still irritates me, I see a person's use of "Correct" to be them validating their own mental model against what you've said. It is extreme shorthand for "No argument, we are in perfect agreeance on that point."

To add to the "correct", I have noticed that a "yes" gets often chewed up by background noise or someone talking over, specially in teleconferencing. To me a "correct" gives a clearer acknowledgement.

My personal tick is "sure". A sure will nearly always prompt me to bark back a "does this mean a clear yes, or a 'sure I guess, if I have to, if there is nothing better'?" This drives me bonkers when we are talking about non-reversible decisions.

"Sure" in that context is short for "For sure", which is short for "I agree with you wholeheartedly"

To me (also non-native speaker) it seems synonymous with "right", "yes" or "mm hmm" so I don't see the issue either. Mind you, in Dutch we'd also say "Klopt", which is a colloquialism that also translates to "that is correct".

> A researcher who bellowed "I HAVE NOT FINISHED" so loud

I've seen this happen once, to the person in our group of friends who was the most "barker". In that context we all had a laugh about it (when he had in fact finished) and it was a useful correction to the group dynamic.

I've also done the "soft" version of this myself: if someone interrupts you, simply up your volume to the highest projection you can without reaching the level of shouting. The interrupter will realise that you're not giving way and trail off, disoriented, within a few words. It does require being able to signal with your tone that you're not losing your temper, you're simply louder than they are and ignoring the interruption.

a more ... active aggressive would be to instantly halt talking, and then as soon as they are done continue with "..continue where I got interrupted"?

This. is exactly how I feel about comments that start with or consist entirely of “This.”

Guilty! but now seen, cannot unsee. A new verbal/written slip I have to try and un-learn to say.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com