← Back to context Comment by sneak 8 months ago Why are filler words bad? Why do we need to be trained not to use them? 4 comments sneak Reply physicles 8 months ago People in this thread point out that filler words make communication less effective, primarily by being distracting. drekipus 8 months ago if you've got nothing to say, you're just adding noise. sneak 8 months ago Why do we care that much about the SNR of spoken words? Language is inherently quite redundant. drekipus 8 months ago Redundancy is still "signal"I don't think it's an argument of efficiency but rather the avoidance of noise.The "ums" isn't redundant, it's not repeating or decorating the conversation. It's filler like static. Stops people from filling the gaps with their own thoughts
physicles 8 months ago People in this thread point out that filler words make communication less effective, primarily by being distracting.
drekipus 8 months ago if you've got nothing to say, you're just adding noise. sneak 8 months ago Why do we care that much about the SNR of spoken words? Language is inherently quite redundant. drekipus 8 months ago Redundancy is still "signal"I don't think it's an argument of efficiency but rather the avoidance of noise.The "ums" isn't redundant, it's not repeating or decorating the conversation. It's filler like static. Stops people from filling the gaps with their own thoughts
sneak 8 months ago Why do we care that much about the SNR of spoken words? Language is inherently quite redundant. drekipus 8 months ago Redundancy is still "signal"I don't think it's an argument of efficiency but rather the avoidance of noise.The "ums" isn't redundant, it's not repeating or decorating the conversation. It's filler like static. Stops people from filling the gaps with their own thoughts
drekipus 8 months ago Redundancy is still "signal"I don't think it's an argument of efficiency but rather the avoidance of noise.The "ums" isn't redundant, it's not repeating or decorating the conversation. It's filler like static. Stops people from filling the gaps with their own thoughts
People in this thread point out that filler words make communication less effective, primarily by being distracting.
if you've got nothing to say, you're just adding noise.
Why do we care that much about the SNR of spoken words? Language is inherently quite redundant.
Redundancy is still "signal"
I don't think it's an argument of efficiency but rather the avoidance of noise.
The "ums" isn't redundant, it's not repeating or decorating the conversation. It's filler like static. Stops people from filling the gaps with their own thoughts