Hearing ‘Yes, no, totally’ – in the wild

The Monitor’s language columnist is at first skeptical of the idea that people say ‘no’ as a way to say ‘yes.’

|
Chris Pizzello/Invision/AP
Lena Dunham, executive producer of the documentary short film 'It's Me, Hilary: The Man Who Drew Eloise,' is interviewed at the premiere of the film at the Egyptian Theatre during the 2015 Sundance Film Festival.

My eight o’clock meeting had wrapped up early, leaving me with a gift of time. 

I decided to start walking toward my 10 o’clock appointment, and when I saw that the most direct route was taking me right past an unfamiliar branch of a favorite cafe, I sensed that some higher power was steering me to a latte and a brioche au sucre.

And it proved to be an opportunity to hear “yes, no, totally” in the wild.

“How’s that again?” you may ask. Let me explain.

A few days before, I had seen a piece by New Yorker writer Kathryn Schulz called “What Part of ‘No, Totally’ Don’t You Understand?” Commenting on the human capacity for using things, and words, for other than their original purposes, she went on to observe, “[L]ately, we have gone in for a particularly dramatic appropriation. In certain situations, it seems, we have started using ‘no’ to mean ‘yes.’ ”

Her Exhibit A was a podcast clip of Lena Dunham, of “Girls” fame, and comedian Marc Maron, in conversation about people who reflexively disparage modern art:

MARON: They can look at any painting and go, “Eh.” They can look at a Rothko and go, “Hey, three colors.” And then you want to hit them.

DUNHAM: No, totally.

In case you missed it, “No, totally” was Ms. Dunham’s affirmation, her indication of agreement with Mr. Maron.

The construction may be favored by the young (Dunham is 28), but it’s not confined to them, Ms. Schulz notes:

“I first started noticing it when a fiftysomething acquaintance responded to a question I asked by saying, ‘Yup! No, very definitely.’ That sent me looking for other examples, which turn out to be almost nonexistent in written English but increasingly abundant in speech.”

In the age of text messaging and YouTube, the distinction between “written English” and “speech” isn’t what it used to be. But Schulz has clearly done some digging: “In 2001, the journalist Bernard Kalb told the White House correspondent Dana Milbank that it was the job of reporters to thoroughly investigate political candidates, to which Milbank responded, ‘Oh, no, yes, I agree with you there.’ In 2012, Anderson Cooper, talking with the CNN senior political analyst Gloria Borger, referred to Newt Gingrich as ‘the guy who has come back from the dead multiple times.’ Borger’s reply veered toward Molly Bloom terrain: ‘Yes, no, exactly, exactly, exactly.’ ”

My initial response to the Schulz piece, though, was, “Really? Do people actually say things like that?”

But back to the cafe and my brioche: I was nibbling away as the bicycle messenger next to me at the counter dug into his serious protein nosh. Then suddenly he was in conversation with an unseen interlocutor: “Yeah, no, totally: I can’t believe I forgot about that.”

And now that you’ve read this, you, too, will start hearing these odd mashups of “yeah, no” everywhere. Totally.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Hearing ‘Yes, no, totally’ – in the wild
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/Verbal-Energy/2015/0507/Hearing-Yes-no-totally-in-the-wild
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe