Over the Korean Thanksgiving holiday, I had more than a few opportunities to talk with friends and strangers in Korean. Such opportunities are always a mixture of self-loathing and confidence-building.
I had a thought one night after coming home from a full day of mumbling my way through conversations in a department store, that my level of fluency in Korean is at least 80% determined by the willingness of the listener to try to hear me. It is amazing what a cooperative conversational partner can do with whatever it is we should call my Korean language ability.
Conversely, it is equally distressing how little I am able to communicate with someone who either chooses not to hear me, or through their own shyness/fear or inexperience, cannot hear me. Suddenly all those inspirational stories, phrases and advice about “listening instead of speaking” I’ve received have new meaning. It’s not that someone who listens more is better than someone who speaks, it’s that the vast majority of communication is accomplished on the listening end of it all. Speech is necessary for listening (though, clearly not for communication), but even the most eloquent speaker can be misunderstood by a poor or inexperienced listener.
And I say inexperienced sincerely. Listening, while the birthright of most humans, is a skill, chiseled by effort and time into a fine work. It is not a passive skill nor does a person who listens much more than speaks a passive person. It is a laborious effort for most and comes easily only to very few people. I suspect there are a few “good listeners” out there who are really just quiet, which is not exactly the same, though if one wishes to develop listening, being quiet is a place to start.
My thinking about listening led me to this idea: First, sense words (sight, sound, etc) have secondary meanings in English to convey the meaning “I understand”. The first to come to mind was, “hear”, as in “I hear you.” A phrase I have come to really like due in small part to the movie, Australia. My idea being that while many of the words for senses can convey understanding, words for “speaking” could not. Here are a few:
“I hear you.”
“I feel you.”
I thought I had stumbled upon an interesting phenomoneon (by which I don’t mean to imply I am the first). However, I soon realized that “speak” can also be used to convey understanding:
“That speaks to me.”
Though I find the structure to be interesting, in a way I’m not particularly clear on yet. The “speaks” example is slightly different in meaning (they all are) than the others, and “see” is really the only one that strictly conveys the idea, “I understand”. The other tend to also imply a sense of empathy or other emotion. “speaks” for example, seems to me to say something like, “I’m struck by this” or some other sense of wonder. “touch” suggests connection, sympathy or gratitude.
So my idea is wrong, in addition, I can think of no way that the word “taste” is commonly used as a metaphor for understanding. “Delicious” is often used to convey a sense of goodness about something other than taste-oriented senses, but understanding isn’t one of them. If you’ve got one, let me know.