← Back to context Comment by sneak 4 days ago Why are filler words bad? Why do we need to be trained not to use them? 4 comments sneak Reply physicles 4 days ago People in this thread point out that filler words make communication less effective, primarily by being distracting. drekipus 4 days ago if you've got nothing to say, you're just adding noise. sneak 3 days ago Why do we care that much about the SNR of spoken words? Language is inherently quite redundant. drekipus 3 days 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 4 days ago People in this thread point out that filler words make communication less effective, primarily by being distracting.
drekipus 4 days ago if you've got nothing to say, you're just adding noise. sneak 3 days ago Why do we care that much about the SNR of spoken words? Language is inherently quite redundant. drekipus 3 days 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 3 days ago Why do we care that much about the SNR of spoken words? Language is inherently quite redundant. drekipus 3 days 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 3 days 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