WEBVTT 00:00:03.240 --> 00:00:06.630 Matt Abrahams: Words and language are conduits for culture. 00:00:06.900 --> 00:00:09.840 My name's Matt Abrahams and I teach Strategic Communication at 00:00:09.840 --> 00:00:11.790 Stanford Graduate School of Business. 00:00:11.850 --> 00:00:14.955 Welcome to Think Fast, talk Smart, the podcast. 00:00:16.560 --> 00:00:19.080 Today I'm delighted to speak with Adam Aleksic. 00:00:19.140 --> 00:00:22.710 Adam is a linguist and content creator posting educational videos 00:00:22.710 --> 00:00:27.240 under the name the Etymology Nerd, and he has over 2 million followers. 00:00:27.600 --> 00:00:31.799 He's lectured on language and social media at Stanford and other top universities. 00:00:32.009 --> 00:00:35.160 His latest book is called Algospeak: How Social Media is 00:00:35.160 --> 00:00:37.620 Transforming the Future of Language. 00:00:38.010 --> 00:00:38.760 Well, welcome Adam. 00:00:38.760 --> 00:00:40.710 I look forward to our conversation. 00:00:40.740 --> 00:00:44.280 My younger son is a follower of yours and he and I are both really 00:00:44.280 --> 00:00:45.930 excited to hear this conversation. 00:00:45.930 --> 00:00:46.620 Thanks for being here. 00:00:46.710 --> 00:00:46.890 Adam Aleksic: Hi. 00:00:46.890 --> 00:00:47.700 Excited to be here. 00:00:47.820 --> 00:00:48.360 Matt Abrahams: Thanks. 00:00:48.360 --> 00:00:49.050 Shall we get started? 00:00:49.140 --> 00:00:49.620 Adam Aleksic: Go ahead. 00:00:50.160 --> 00:00:54.269 Matt Abrahams: As the son of both a lawyer and an elementary school teacher, 00:00:54.330 --> 00:00:57.570 language and words have always been really important and interesting in my life. 00:00:57.570 --> 00:01:01.080 I'm curious, where did your interest and passion come from and 00:01:01.080 --> 00:01:03.990 why should any of us care about the words we use in our grammar? 00:01:04.590 --> 00:01:06.750 Adam Aleksic: If I'm being honest, I got into it for the fun facts. 00:01:06.750 --> 00:01:09.990 I read this book in 10th grade, The Etymologicon, great book, connecting 00:01:09.990 --> 00:01:12.630 how different words are all related to each other in different ways. 00:01:12.840 --> 00:01:13.440 Fascinating. 00:01:13.770 --> 00:01:16.680 And then the more I looked into it, the more I started doing my own research and 00:01:16.680 --> 00:01:18.330 eventually studied linguistics in college. 00:01:18.420 --> 00:01:22.465 I began to realize that language is the way humans identify the world 00:01:22.465 --> 00:01:23.905 and relate that to each other. 00:01:24.055 --> 00:01:26.125 It's so much more than just fun facts. 00:01:26.125 --> 00:01:28.015 But those are still good, you know, in and of themselves. 00:01:28.345 --> 00:01:31.255 It's how we communicate, who we are as people. 00:01:31.255 --> 00:01:33.745 And you can see this as a, language as a proxy for culture. 00:01:34.075 --> 00:01:34.705 Matt Abrahams: Absolutely. 00:01:34.705 --> 00:01:37.705 And if you have a word to identify it, then it exists and you 00:01:37.705 --> 00:01:39.025 can share that meaning, right? 00:01:39.325 --> 00:01:39.745 Adam Aleksic: Exactly. 00:01:39.745 --> 00:01:42.415 But once it's identified, it also changes reality a little bit. 00:01:42.535 --> 00:01:43.975 The fact that a label is out there. 00:01:44.385 --> 00:01:46.725 You identify either with that label or against that label. 00:01:46.755 --> 00:01:49.725 If that label wasn't there, now it's not something affecting your identity. 00:01:49.905 --> 00:01:52.455 This is something that's very interesting to me 'cause the book 00:01:52.455 --> 00:01:55.485 that I wrote gets into algorithms and how algorithms create new words. 00:01:55.725 --> 00:01:58.335 And you have new labels out there because algorithms push these, 00:01:58.335 --> 00:01:59.515 like cottagecore or something. 00:01:59.515 --> 00:02:02.365 Now that cottagecore is out there, I'm either cottagecore, I'm not cottagecore, 00:02:02.384 --> 00:02:04.005 and that affects my identity subtly. 00:02:04.065 --> 00:02:05.535 Matt Abrahams: I have no idea what cottagecore is. 00:02:05.535 --> 00:02:06.255 Will you share with me? 00:02:06.340 --> 00:02:10.150 Adam Aleksic: It's a fashion aesthetic of like, it's sort of a bucolic lifestyle of 00:02:10.150 --> 00:02:13.180 prairies and whatever, and you're dressing toward that aesthetic, but it's packaged 00:02:13.180 --> 00:02:14.710 as an entire lifestyle on social media. 00:02:14.830 --> 00:02:15.640 Matt Abrahams: Interesting. 00:02:15.640 --> 00:02:20.470 So when Spotify identifies a particular type of music or labels a type of 00:02:20.470 --> 00:02:23.200 music, all of a sudden it now exists and you're either it or not it. 00:02:23.230 --> 00:02:23.830 Adam Aleksic: Exactly. 00:02:23.830 --> 00:02:27.295 For this book, I actually interviewed Spotify's Chief Data Alchemist, Glenn 00:02:27.295 --> 00:02:30.995 McDonald and they have over eight thousand micro genres on Spotify. 00:02:31.055 --> 00:02:33.365 You know, in the past we'd have something like R and B, hip hop, pop. 00:02:33.545 --> 00:02:35.935 Now it's also escape room, preverb. 00:02:36.125 --> 00:02:39.095 These are like things they made up because they're just putting new 00:02:39.095 --> 00:02:42.695 labels on things, and now artists try to conform their musical identity 00:02:42.815 --> 00:02:44.315 for these labels that are out there. 00:02:44.495 --> 00:02:47.795 Hyper pop is the term that wasn't really on the scene until Spotify 00:02:47.795 --> 00:02:50.055 created a hyper pop genre in 2018. 00:02:50.355 --> 00:02:53.704 And now people are trying to make hyper pop, they're arguing over 00:02:53.704 --> 00:02:55.174 what is and what isn't hyper pop. 00:02:55.355 --> 00:02:57.065 But they wouldn't have been doing that otherwise. 00:02:57.065 --> 00:03:01.505 They would've maybe just been making music in this space and more fluid perhaps, 00:03:01.715 --> 00:03:03.185 but maybe the label constraints identity. 00:03:03.185 --> 00:03:06.275 At the same time, maybe the label gives people a way to pinpoint 00:03:06.275 --> 00:03:07.835 exactly what this thing is. 00:03:07.925 --> 00:03:09.785 So what you were saying, words have tremendous power. 00:03:09.995 --> 00:03:11.135 Matt Abrahams: That's fascinating. 00:03:11.135 --> 00:03:15.155 The, the words we use not only create and identify what exists in 00:03:15.155 --> 00:03:19.560 the world, but how we see ourselves as being part of or not part of. 00:03:19.980 --> 00:03:22.809 So let me ask you talk a lot about algospeak. 00:03:22.959 --> 00:03:26.670 What is algospeak and how is it impacting our communication? 00:03:26.850 --> 00:03:30.390 Adam Aleksic: Traditionally, algospeak has been the label for speech used to 00:03:30.390 --> 00:03:32.970 circumvent algorithmic censorship online. 00:03:33.329 --> 00:03:35.529 The classic example is the word un-alive. 00:03:35.545 --> 00:03:37.825 You can't say kill on TikTok or you can say it, but your 00:03:37.825 --> 00:03:38.875 video might be suppressed. 00:03:39.084 --> 00:03:42.954 So many creators choose instead to use words like un-alive, and now we have kids 00:03:42.954 --> 00:03:46.345 in middle schools writing essays about Hamlet contemplating un-aliving himself 00:03:46.375 --> 00:03:47.725 simply because they see it on TikTok. 00:03:47.725 --> 00:03:49.885 And so now this is also changing our reality as well. 00:03:49.975 --> 00:03:52.734 That's traditionally been what's referred to as algospeak, and that's 00:03:52.734 --> 00:03:55.195 what got me interested in this because I'm a creator and I'm a linguist, and I 00:03:55.195 --> 00:03:58.075 started studying my own language because you can't not if you're those things. 00:03:58.345 --> 00:04:03.024 And I started realizing, wow, my speech is being hampered and by the 00:04:03.024 --> 00:04:04.375 algorithm I have to reroute around it. 00:04:05.055 --> 00:04:08.125 At the same time, it's so much more than censorship, like un-alive. 00:04:08.535 --> 00:04:13.394 It's memes, it's trends, it's which groups are created, it's where words 00:04:13.394 --> 00:04:15.734 come from in the first place, and how quickly those words spread. 00:04:15.975 --> 00:04:16.305 Matt Abrahams: Wow. 00:04:16.305 --> 00:04:20.925 So the algorithms are replacing the traditional way that new words 00:04:20.925 --> 00:04:24.375 came into being, subcultures, using concepts, and ideas. 00:04:24.615 --> 00:04:29.975 Given that there's this new language, if you will, or at least new words in a 00:04:29.975 --> 00:04:32.405 language, how do we best become fluent? 00:04:32.435 --> 00:04:35.435 I'm thinking of the modern day workplace where you have four 00:04:35.435 --> 00:04:40.385 generations of folks, and some folks are religiously on TikTok and Instagram 00:04:40.385 --> 00:04:42.215 and part of that algorithm culture. 00:04:42.425 --> 00:04:45.675 And then you've got folks who are older who don't even know what those things are. 00:04:45.854 --> 00:04:49.005 How can we expect to communicate when we're not even speaking 00:04:49.005 --> 00:04:50.565 the same language in some cases? 00:04:50.625 --> 00:04:50.865 Adam Aleksic: Right. 00:04:50.865 --> 00:04:54.315 Each social setting comes with a unique set of linguistic expectations. 00:04:54.375 --> 00:04:57.255 In the workplace, like you described, there's still like a general corporate 00:04:57.255 --> 00:05:00.855 kind of language or an attitude about what words are acceptable and not acceptable. 00:05:01.065 --> 00:05:02.474 Same with un-alive, right? 00:05:02.474 --> 00:05:05.410 It seems unacceptable for a kid to write that in an essay. 00:05:05.410 --> 00:05:08.770 But it's acceptable to say on TikTok because that actually is the expectation, 00:05:08.770 --> 00:05:12.640 that's the sociolect, the social kind of dialect of the internet, 00:05:12.640 --> 00:05:15.760 that people have this certain way of speaking that finds a community. 00:05:15.970 --> 00:05:21.010 Matt Abrahams: So if we are to be a leader in an organization, a manager of a group, 00:05:21.010 --> 00:05:27.070 and I want everybody to feel included in that group, do I have to have a glossary 00:05:27.070 --> 00:05:29.220 of terms that we agree to, to use? 00:05:29.220 --> 00:05:31.760 If I've got a colleague that refers to something I don't 00:05:31.760 --> 00:05:33.830 understand, am I being left out? 00:05:33.830 --> 00:05:35.390 Am I being ostracized? 00:05:35.599 --> 00:05:38.300 What recommendations do you have or have you seen so that we can 00:05:38.300 --> 00:05:39.560 all communicate the same way? 00:05:39.770 --> 00:05:41.930 Adam Aleksic: Well, I think a lot of these expectations are implicit, 00:05:41.930 --> 00:05:44.960 and it's strange to make a list of words that are acceptable and not. 00:05:45.030 --> 00:05:47.789 There are key words that are being flagged by the algorithm, or some words 00:05:47.789 --> 00:05:50.849 the algorithm knows are trending, and then the algorithm pushes them and 00:05:50.849 --> 00:05:54.299 then creators use these words, and then the word gets perpetuated further into 00:05:54.299 --> 00:05:55.890 virality, and now it's more of a word. 00:05:56.099 --> 00:05:57.680 That to me is also algospeak. 00:05:57.900 --> 00:06:00.330 I'm a strong believer that the medium is the message. 00:06:00.359 --> 00:06:03.239 Every single medium uniquely affects how we communicate and we 00:06:03.270 --> 00:06:05.169 adapt our speech to these medium. 00:06:05.375 --> 00:06:09.275 The algorithm is one such medium, and we have a unique way of speaking for these 00:06:09.335 --> 00:06:13.385 because algorithms are an infrastructure underlying how videos get distributed. 00:06:13.385 --> 00:06:16.295 You have to appeal to this algorithm, not only in which words you're 00:06:16.445 --> 00:06:19.265 using to avoid censorship, but also in which words go more viral. 00:06:19.325 --> 00:06:22.625 But also, generally, if this is a social expectation that we should 00:06:22.625 --> 00:06:24.665 be speaking this way, you have to accommodate for that as well. 00:06:25.110 --> 00:06:27.480 In a office setting, the medium is different. 00:06:27.750 --> 00:06:30.600 You should not be using the word un-alive in the office, and 00:06:30.870 --> 00:06:32.100 that's just not the expectation. 00:06:32.280 --> 00:06:35.460 Matt Abrahams: So each context brings its own expectations, which brings along 00:06:35.460 --> 00:06:37.140 with it the certain rules that you have. 00:06:37.380 --> 00:06:38.490 I find it really interesting. 00:06:38.580 --> 00:06:42.720 One of the most ubiquitous bits of advice that comes from this podcast 00:06:42.720 --> 00:06:45.570 is you need to know your audience and you need to adjust and adapt. 00:06:45.630 --> 00:06:48.480 And I'm hearing that you're adding a new audience that some of us 00:06:48.480 --> 00:06:51.805 need to consider, which is the algorithm and the tools that we use. 00:06:51.895 --> 00:06:55.525 And that's really interesting because if I want to be understood, I need 00:06:55.525 --> 00:06:59.094 to at least speak the same language or understand and appreciate the 00:06:59.094 --> 00:07:00.655 language of the tool that I'm using. 00:07:00.895 --> 00:07:02.275 Adam Aleksic: The context is really important. 00:07:02.305 --> 00:07:05.125 For example, right now, I know I'm talking to you and I'm accommodating 00:07:05.125 --> 00:07:06.414 my communication to talk to you. 00:07:06.625 --> 00:07:09.865 However, we're also being observed by an audience of many other people, 00:07:09.865 --> 00:07:13.974 and I don't know who these people are, so I'm using a psycholinguistic 00:07:14.125 --> 00:07:18.235 phenomenon known as audience design, where I have an idea of a perceived 00:07:18.235 --> 00:07:21.869 imaginary audience and I am accommodating my communication for that as well. 00:07:21.869 --> 00:07:25.739 This is something we've seen with radio hosts and broadcast presenters. 00:07:26.070 --> 00:07:28.440 You'll notice that they talk in specific accents, right? 00:07:28.859 --> 00:07:31.739 Uh, I was on NPR the other day, they were talking about the NPR 00:07:31.739 --> 00:07:33.239 accent and how they talk like that. 00:07:33.239 --> 00:07:35.789 And we all know, this just in, breaking news, they have a certain 00:07:35.789 --> 00:07:37.140 way of speaking on TV as well. 00:07:37.349 --> 00:07:39.809 Influencers as well have a sort of an influencer accent. 00:07:39.840 --> 00:07:42.419 They're accommodating for their perceived audience. 00:07:42.419 --> 00:07:46.109 And again, this comes with the specific social setting and the norms and the 00:07:46.109 --> 00:07:48.299 underlying values of that medium. 00:07:48.539 --> 00:07:52.575 However, we're also communicating, not only for the actual person 00:07:52.575 --> 00:07:55.815 in front of us, not only for the people invisibly perceiving us, 00:07:55.815 --> 00:07:57.405 but also for the algorithm itself. 00:07:57.555 --> 00:08:01.335 There's also this invisible infrastructure that analyzes every single word that's 00:08:01.335 --> 00:08:04.695 uploaded to these platforms, and you need to be performing for that as well. 00:08:05.055 --> 00:08:07.995 Matt Abrahams: I want to come back to influencers and creators in a moment, 00:08:07.995 --> 00:08:09.675 but two questions pop into mind. 00:08:10.120 --> 00:08:13.635 AI and the algorithms are only as good as the data that they have 00:08:13.695 --> 00:08:15.255 come to digest and understand. 00:08:15.575 --> 00:08:22.685 As language is changing, is it possible that the algorithms don't yet know 00:08:22.835 --> 00:08:26.435 what some of these words and terms mean and they might actually make mistakes? 00:08:26.465 --> 00:08:28.534 Adam Aleksic: Not only possible, but that's exactly the reality. 00:08:28.685 --> 00:08:33.934 The fact is that AI, as sophisticated as it is, has a training set and 00:08:33.995 --> 00:08:36.699 has reinforcement learning that is a biased version of reality. 00:08:37.304 --> 00:08:40.725 It contains an idea or representation of language that is a map, but the 00:08:40.725 --> 00:08:42.405 map can never be the territory itself. 00:08:42.674 --> 00:08:45.645 So the way human language is actually used in all of its nuances in all 00:08:45.645 --> 00:08:48.645 of its little forms and the way that it's currently changing, AI 00:08:48.645 --> 00:08:50.175 can never fully catch up to that. 00:08:50.175 --> 00:08:52.844 And that's why if you ask ChatGPT to use slang, I don't think 00:08:52.844 --> 00:08:54.600 it'll ever quite be hip to that. 00:08:54.810 --> 00:08:58.050 Human language is always one step ahead, which is why we come up with 00:08:58.050 --> 00:09:01.140 new phrases like un-alive and now that's being censored as well because 00:09:01.140 --> 00:09:02.160 the algorithm caught onto that. 00:09:02.370 --> 00:09:05.490 But now creators use phrases like, still unalive, but like spelled with 00:09:05.490 --> 00:09:08.220 an at sign instead of an A, or an exclamation point instead of an I, 00:09:08.340 --> 00:09:09.630 one step ahead of the algorithm. 00:09:09.840 --> 00:09:12.480 If there's one thing I can count on humans, it's that we are ingenious 00:09:12.480 --> 00:09:14.730 and tenacious with coming up new ways to express ourselves. 00:09:14.995 --> 00:09:17.875 Matt Abrahams: I wanna dig into your expertise as an influencer 00:09:17.875 --> 00:09:21.675 yourself, as the Etymology Nerd, but as somebody who studied algospeak. 00:09:22.015 --> 00:09:25.645 If it is all about getting attention, sustaining attention, leading to 00:09:25.645 --> 00:09:29.755 virality, so your ideas get heard by more and more people, what types of 00:09:29.755 --> 00:09:34.345 advice would you give to people who are trying to be really fluent and 00:09:34.345 --> 00:09:37.195 maximize what algospeak gives for them? 00:09:37.195 --> 00:09:40.075 Are there some specific tips and tricks that you would recommend? 00:09:40.315 --> 00:09:42.355 Adam Aleksic: Start with what these platforms want. 00:09:42.410 --> 00:09:44.630 The platforms give us the infrastructure. 00:09:44.839 --> 00:09:49.850 And unfortunately, they are trying to grab our attention as much as possible to 00:09:49.939 --> 00:09:53.600 commodify us as people so they can sell our data and so they can sell us ads. 00:09:53.600 --> 00:09:54.350 That's what they're doing. 00:09:54.589 --> 00:09:56.000 They make the structures in place. 00:09:56.000 --> 00:09:58.250 They have retention as like one of them, that's like how long 00:09:58.250 --> 00:09:59.360 people stay watching a video. 00:09:59.550 --> 00:10:02.400 They use engagement metrics and whether they recommend videos, that's like likes, 00:10:02.400 --> 00:10:03.990 comments, shares, all that normal stuff. 00:10:04.199 --> 00:10:08.459 So as influencers, you are then incentivized to maximize for these things. 00:10:08.640 --> 00:10:12.630 It's all downstream of how the medium is baking in certain expectations, 00:10:12.630 --> 00:10:15.209 certain priorities, and so you need to be very aware of that. 00:10:15.209 --> 00:10:18.660 And it's also, again, be aware of your invisible watching audience as well. 00:10:19.030 --> 00:10:21.430 I speak differently than the lifestyle influencer because 00:10:21.430 --> 00:10:22.420 I have a different audience. 00:10:22.420 --> 00:10:25.780 The lifestyle influencer is probably speaking to young women who expect this 00:10:25.780 --> 00:10:27.490 sort of valley girl derived accent. 00:10:27.730 --> 00:10:31.000 I speak very quickly, I mean, I do in real life, but I'll online, I'll 00:10:31.000 --> 00:10:33.670 stress more words to keep you watching my video to make sure you don't scroll 00:10:33.670 --> 00:10:36.760 away, and I'll uptalk as well, but it'll be like a different thing than 00:10:36.760 --> 00:10:39.340 the lifestyle influencer, because I'm also accommodating for both my 00:10:39.340 --> 00:10:40.810 imaginary audience and the algorithm. 00:10:41.220 --> 00:10:44.160 Matt Abrahams: Really interesting, and you're making me think about what 00:10:44.160 --> 00:10:46.050 I do linguistically when I speak. 00:10:46.200 --> 00:10:49.410 I guess I am purposely doing things for that imagined audience. 00:10:49.710 --> 00:10:52.230 It might not be good for the algorithm, which might not be good 00:10:52.230 --> 00:10:53.850 for me to get my word out there. 00:10:54.090 --> 00:10:57.270 Are there certain things people can do that enhance virality 00:10:57.330 --> 00:10:59.460 beyond just the spoken word? 00:10:59.460 --> 00:11:03.780 So for example, what we name our posts, which not everybody's an influencer or 00:11:03.780 --> 00:11:06.390 creator, but I put titles on emails. 00:11:06.390 --> 00:11:08.250 I label what my meeting is. 00:11:08.250 --> 00:11:10.710 Are there words, I mean, words, communication as well? 00:11:11.064 --> 00:11:12.865 Adam Aleksic: Written words grab our attention more than other things. 00:11:12.865 --> 00:11:14.725 I wanna bring in visual semiotics as well. 00:11:15.025 --> 00:11:16.015 Matt Abrahams: Stay, take a step back. 00:11:16.165 --> 00:11:17.574 Define semiotics for us. 00:11:17.635 --> 00:11:21.055 Adam Aleksic: Oh, it's symbols, things we look at that have meaning. 00:11:21.355 --> 00:11:24.055 So the fact that we have microphones right now in front of us, and if this 00:11:24.055 --> 00:11:26.665 is uploaded to social media, there's studies that have been done that show 00:11:26.665 --> 00:11:30.115 that videos where people have microphones in front of them go more viral than 00:11:30.115 --> 00:11:32.035 otherwise because they connote authority. 00:11:32.185 --> 00:11:35.335 This is a semiotic symbol that holds authority within it. 00:11:35.605 --> 00:11:37.735 And so there's actually an influx right now of real creators 00:11:37.735 --> 00:11:40.925 using fake microphones because that simply goes more viral. 00:11:40.925 --> 00:11:43.025 And it literally is a visual indicator that this person has 00:11:43.025 --> 00:11:43.985 something important to say. 00:11:44.165 --> 00:11:48.695 And so we are subconsciously primed to perceive that person as more 00:11:48.695 --> 00:11:51.795 important and as having something worthy when they're talking. 00:11:51.935 --> 00:11:52.670 And so we watch further. 00:11:53.834 --> 00:11:55.064 Matt Abrahams: I really find that fascinating. 00:11:55.064 --> 00:11:57.885 Not everybody, again, is going to be a creator or influencer, but all of 00:11:57.885 --> 00:12:01.305 us do virtual presentations where we might put a background behind us, and 00:12:01.305 --> 00:12:04.545 you have to think about what's in that background because that sends a semiotic 00:12:04.545 --> 00:12:05.685 message, as you're talking about. 00:12:05.685 --> 00:12:06.885 It's implying things. 00:12:06.885 --> 00:12:09.105 Adam Aleksic: I think culturally we're still grappling with the move 00:12:09.105 --> 00:12:11.715 to Zoom and the fact that you can just see inside people's bedrooms now. 00:12:11.715 --> 00:12:12.555 That's crazy. 00:12:12.555 --> 00:12:15.740 So now your bedroom, this very private sanctum, is now perceived as 00:12:15.765 --> 00:12:17.295 a professional environment as well. 00:12:17.655 --> 00:12:22.125 In the same way that we see visual stuff very physically affect how we perceive 00:12:22.440 --> 00:12:26.880 a message, the same is happening with communication, both written and verbal. 00:12:27.270 --> 00:12:29.715 Matt Abrahams: I'd like to talk a little bit about the word like. 00:12:30.435 --> 00:12:37.155 Because it is used in a variety of ways and I'm curious to get your perception 00:12:37.155 --> 00:12:41.235 of its evolution, and people use like in some ways as a filler, in some ways 00:12:41.235 --> 00:12:43.635 as to, to replace the word says or said. 00:12:43.875 --> 00:12:44.985 Help me understand like. 00:12:45.165 --> 00:12:46.585 Adam Aleksic: Yeah, this isn't even algospeak. 00:12:46.605 --> 00:12:51.165 It goes back to 1980s Valley girl speech and early internet speak, 00:12:51.165 --> 00:12:53.080 but also like you, haha ha ha. 00:12:53.925 --> 00:12:55.425 I just used it as a filler word right there. 00:12:55.605 --> 00:12:59.055 When you said you can use it as a synonym for said that's not quite true. 00:12:59.055 --> 00:13:00.765 It has its own kind of feeling. 00:13:00.855 --> 00:13:05.055 Said is more connoting evidentiality, that you literally 00:13:05.055 --> 00:13:06.584 are repeating something verbatim. 00:13:06.795 --> 00:13:11.145 Like is embodying an affect of somebody who communicated something 00:13:11.145 --> 00:13:13.755 but not necessarily saying one hundred percent this is what they said. 00:13:14.055 --> 00:13:17.675 So if I said, then she was like, that party was low-key great. 00:13:17.885 --> 00:13:20.435 I'm not necessarily stating that she literally said that. 00:13:20.675 --> 00:13:24.635 But all these uses kind of evolved out of how young women talked in 00:13:24.725 --> 00:13:26.825 California in the eighties and nineties. 00:13:27.185 --> 00:13:30.665 And language often follows the conduits of what is perceived as 00:13:30.785 --> 00:13:33.785 popular, what is perceived as cool, what is perceived as funny, even. 00:13:33.965 --> 00:13:38.075 And the Valley girls were popular and they spread language because of that. 00:13:38.790 --> 00:13:41.820 Matt Abrahams: I grew up in California in the eighties, and I remember 00:13:41.820 --> 00:13:45.390 Valley Girls speak very much, and it's interesting to see what has lasted 00:13:45.390 --> 00:13:47.040 from that all these years later. 00:13:47.550 --> 00:13:52.650 You know, for the past little while I've been studying how we can use ambiguity 00:13:52.800 --> 00:13:54.900 in our communication strategically. 00:13:54.960 --> 00:13:56.220 Hedging language, if you will. 00:13:56.850 --> 00:13:59.880 Think of things like politeness, flirtation, negotiation. 00:14:00.210 --> 00:14:04.080 All of these are situations where indirect speech, indirect language 00:14:04.320 --> 00:14:06.030 can actually be very helpful to you. 00:14:06.360 --> 00:14:07.590 We don't wanna get in trouble. 00:14:07.590 --> 00:14:10.950 We don't wanna risk our reputation or make a mistake, so we use 00:14:10.950 --> 00:14:12.780 this ambiguous hedging language. 00:14:12.990 --> 00:14:16.080 What are your thoughts on ambiguity and how does that play 00:14:16.080 --> 00:14:18.030 out in this world of algorithms? 00:14:18.210 --> 00:14:21.000 Adam Aleksic: My first ever linguistics research project that I did as a 00:14:21.000 --> 00:14:25.215 senior in high school was, I was an intern at a court and I was analyzing 00:14:25.235 --> 00:14:26.795 how lawyers talk to the judges. 00:14:27.105 --> 00:14:29.925 And they'll often say things like, your Honor, I would submit this brief, 00:14:29.985 --> 00:14:31.125 as they're submitting the brief. 00:14:31.125 --> 00:14:33.225 You don't need to say would, right, theoretically, because you're 00:14:33.225 --> 00:14:34.215 literally submitting the brief. 00:14:34.215 --> 00:14:37.574 You could say, your Honor, I'm submitting this brief, but they say would as a hedge. 00:14:37.605 --> 00:14:41.055 They say it because it shows deference, it shows politeness to the judge. 00:14:41.115 --> 00:14:43.635 And this is how you'll see a lot of people use this sort of, that would is 00:14:43.635 --> 00:14:45.375 an example of a modal, auxiliary verb. 00:14:45.375 --> 00:14:48.135 And you can say, I could, I should do this, I shan't do that. 00:14:48.165 --> 00:14:53.400 All of that is an example of modifying your speech to make it seem more polite. 00:14:53.420 --> 00:14:56.030 And like is actually, one use of the word like is to hedge. 00:14:56.210 --> 00:14:58.640 It's showing that you're not asserting yourself too much. 00:14:59.060 --> 00:15:02.570 On social media, I think it's probably bad to hedge that much 00:15:02.750 --> 00:15:04.790 because we want to convey authority. 00:15:04.790 --> 00:15:07.280 That's why the fake microphones actually work, and real microphones, 00:15:07.280 --> 00:15:08.390 these are real, I'm assuming. 00:15:09.620 --> 00:15:12.200 But hedging does work depending on different contexts. 00:15:12.440 --> 00:15:16.730 If you're trying to talk to a judge, maybe it is good to be less abrasive. 00:15:17.325 --> 00:15:17.865 Matt Abrahams: I see. 00:15:18.075 --> 00:15:22.875 The hedges that, that bother me the most are, I think and kind of because 00:15:22.875 --> 00:15:26.275 they diminish your status and power, but at some points, in some ways 00:15:26.515 --> 00:15:28.385 they can serve a useful function. 00:15:28.385 --> 00:15:32.355 If I'm the big boss and you're my employee and I genuinely want your 00:15:32.355 --> 00:15:36.465 input, if I were to say, I kind of think we should do this, what do you think? 00:15:36.465 --> 00:15:40.155 That lowers my status and the certitude of my assertion, so 00:15:40.155 --> 00:15:43.185 that you're more likely to say something, versus, we should do this. 00:15:43.530 --> 00:15:44.220 What do you think? 00:15:44.220 --> 00:15:47.940 That's a very different sounding phrase, so I find that really interesting. 00:15:47.940 --> 00:15:49.770 Do you see that play out in your world? 00:15:49.830 --> 00:15:50.010 Adam Aleksic: Yeah. 00:15:50.010 --> 00:15:52.770 When we're talking about performativity, one thing you're performing for is 00:15:52.770 --> 00:15:55.890 there's always an imbued power dynamic in any conversation you're having. 00:15:55.950 --> 00:15:58.620 So if we were like seated on stage in front of an audience, the audience is 00:15:58.620 --> 00:16:00.060 definitely less powerful or something. 00:16:00.060 --> 00:16:01.890 Or if you're talking to your boss, that's a perfect example. 00:16:01.890 --> 00:16:04.710 You have less power than your boss and you need to show deference. 00:16:04.710 --> 00:16:07.415 And there's languages like Japanese that literally encode this. 00:16:07.415 --> 00:16:10.865 They have many layers of like different particles you attach to show your 00:16:10.865 --> 00:16:12.455 relationship to this other person. 00:16:12.635 --> 00:16:14.915 In English, we do the same thing, but we do that through 00:16:14.915 --> 00:16:16.385 these sort of hedging particles. 00:16:16.745 --> 00:16:17.255 Matt Abrahams: Interesting. 00:16:17.255 --> 00:16:20.135 I love learning from you and I, I love the ideas of language. 00:16:20.495 --> 00:16:23.675 I'd like you to reflect, across all of your work, the book you've written, all 00:16:23.675 --> 00:16:27.185 of the social posts you do, your own research that you've done, what are two 00:16:27.185 --> 00:16:32.775 or three key actionable takeaways that our listeners can have from that body of work 00:16:32.995 --> 00:16:37.420 that will help us in our communication and help us in the language that we use? 00:16:37.660 --> 00:16:40.990 Adam Aleksic: Takeaway number one, each medium is going to uniquely affect how we 00:16:40.990 --> 00:16:44.230 communicate, and you need to be exactly aware of what that medium is doing 00:16:44.230 --> 00:16:45.530 if you wanna communicate effectively. 00:16:45.820 --> 00:16:48.585 Algorithms are a new inflection point for language. 00:16:48.705 --> 00:16:52.335 I think as a medium, they value attention more than any 00:16:52.335 --> 00:16:53.625 previous medium we may have had. 00:16:53.925 --> 00:16:57.015 It's causing language to occur faster, and you need to be tapped into 00:16:57.015 --> 00:16:58.995 these trends because that's another thing these algorithms are pushing. 00:16:59.025 --> 00:17:00.255 So be aware of the medium. 00:17:00.795 --> 00:17:03.570 The second one is that algorithms are changing the way we speak. 00:17:04.319 --> 00:17:07.619 It's a reality that, even if you're not online, you need to be aware of 00:17:07.619 --> 00:17:09.899 these new slang words, where they're coming from, because these are also 00:17:09.899 --> 00:17:11.490 conduits of culture, like I said earlier. 00:17:11.699 --> 00:17:14.849 We know like in the same way that like came from Valley girl English, 00:17:15.119 --> 00:17:18.209 there's like conduits of popularity, what we perceive as cool or 00:17:18.209 --> 00:17:19.619 prestigious, and we borrow from that. 00:17:19.829 --> 00:17:22.800 It's good to be aware of these things so we can communicate more effectively 00:17:22.979 --> 00:17:25.679 and so that we can be more aware of our own word choice and perhaps the 00:17:25.679 --> 00:17:26.895 implications of what words we're using. 00:17:27.584 --> 00:17:29.925 Matt Abrahams: I wanna put an exclamation point after this notion 00:17:29.925 --> 00:17:34.185 of every channel through which you communicate, we have to be mindful 00:17:34.185 --> 00:17:37.304 and think through the language that we use to communicate for that channel. 00:17:37.304 --> 00:17:39.885 A lot of us just create one message and then put it out in lots of 00:17:39.885 --> 00:17:43.425 different channels, and we might be missing an opportunity to optimize. 00:17:43.784 --> 00:17:46.574 And we might be doing ourselves a disservice because in essence, we're 00:17:46.574 --> 00:17:49.395 not communicating in the way that we should, and the algorithm is of one 00:17:49.395 --> 00:17:50.895 big channel we need to be considering. 00:17:51.135 --> 00:17:52.215 So I'm a grammarian. 00:17:52.574 --> 00:17:53.804 I think grammar is important. 00:17:54.044 --> 00:17:55.605 I will defend the Oxford comma. 00:17:55.860 --> 00:17:57.780 I'm curious what you think about grammar. 00:17:58.169 --> 00:17:59.399 How does grammar play out? 00:17:59.399 --> 00:18:02.850 I know in social media people don't use grammar, and in fact, when I text 00:18:02.850 --> 00:18:06.419 younger people and I put punctuation in, it actually conveys meaning 00:18:06.419 --> 00:18:08.070 that I'm not intending it to convey. 00:18:08.310 --> 00:18:09.419 What are your thoughts about grammar? 00:18:09.959 --> 00:18:12.240 Adam Aleksic: Grammar is a set of rules or expectations about 00:18:12.240 --> 00:18:13.290 how language should be used. 00:18:13.515 --> 00:18:16.035 This differs on context, and this is where I might push back on you. 00:18:16.035 --> 00:18:18.975 I agree grammar exists and I agree that when I'm writing my 00:18:18.975 --> 00:18:22.155 book, I should use the standard grammatical conventions of English. 00:18:22.155 --> 00:18:24.585 I am an Oxford comma enjoyer in that context. 00:18:24.915 --> 00:18:29.565 If I'm texting my friend or my roommate or something like that, it doesn't matter. 00:18:29.565 --> 00:18:32.955 In fact, it would be weird if I used a period when I texted my friend, 00:18:32.955 --> 00:18:36.764 because here's the thing about texts and how boomers tend to, no offense, 00:18:36.764 --> 00:18:39.735 hey, they tend to use more periods in their text than younger people. 00:18:40.095 --> 00:18:43.155 The act of sending a text itself is already a signal 00:18:43.155 --> 00:18:44.385 that the sentence is completed. 00:18:44.475 --> 00:18:46.995 So going out of your way to include an extra period is 00:18:46.995 --> 00:18:48.855 actually saying something extra. 00:18:49.125 --> 00:18:51.345 You have your sentence and then you have this period at the end of it 00:18:51.345 --> 00:18:53.955 that you didn't need to send because the message as a whole already 00:18:53.955 --> 00:18:55.754 communicated that this message ended. 00:18:55.995 --> 00:18:58.395 So now we as younger people are asking ourselves, why 00:18:58.395 --> 00:18:59.415 did this person add a period? 00:18:59.475 --> 00:19:00.915 And we think that's passive aggressive. 00:19:00.915 --> 00:19:02.895 And so there's this idea of a passive aggressive period. 00:19:03.135 --> 00:19:05.835 Matt Abrahams: You have convinced me not to put a period. 00:19:05.895 --> 00:19:07.995 While not a boomer, I do appreciate that. 00:19:08.425 --> 00:19:12.945 I appreciate that grammar, syntax is important and it, it varies by channel. 00:19:13.330 --> 00:19:15.520 Adam Aleksic: If anything, that's what I mean when I say that every 00:19:15.520 --> 00:19:17.080 medium really affects the message. 00:19:17.350 --> 00:19:20.080 It's good to be aware of standard grammar for sure, because there's 00:19:20.080 --> 00:19:22.210 a lot of context in which that is the way you professionally 00:19:22.210 --> 00:19:23.230 communicate with other people. 00:19:23.410 --> 00:19:26.500 But it's also good to be aware of the informal grammars and being 00:19:26.500 --> 00:19:28.780 aware of all these grammars at once allows us to communicate 00:19:28.780 --> 00:19:29.770 better across different medium. 00:19:30.100 --> 00:19:30.250 Matt Abrahams: Yeah. 00:19:30.310 --> 00:19:32.920 But it puts the onus on us to actually take the time to think 00:19:32.920 --> 00:19:33.790 about that and learn that. 00:19:33.790 --> 00:19:34.510 Absolutely. 00:19:35.745 --> 00:19:38.535 So Adam, before we end, I like to ask three questions of everyone. 00:19:38.655 --> 00:19:40.875 One I create just for you and the other two I've been 00:19:40.875 --> 00:19:42.285 asking across all the episodes. 00:19:42.285 --> 00:19:42.915 Are you ready for that? 00:19:43.125 --> 00:19:43.515 Adam Aleksic: Let's do it. 00:19:43.785 --> 00:19:47.775 Matt Abrahams: So I would like, as a very bright young linguist, for you to 00:19:47.775 --> 00:19:52.035 give a commentary on the name of this podcast because it is grammatically 00:19:52.035 --> 00:19:55.185 incorrect, Think Fast Talk Smart. 00:19:55.515 --> 00:19:58.755 It should not be grammatically worded that way. 00:19:58.935 --> 00:20:00.495 Is this a good thing? 00:20:00.495 --> 00:20:01.515 Is this a bad thing? 00:20:01.515 --> 00:20:02.295 What do you think? 00:20:02.535 --> 00:20:06.014 Adam Aleksic: It's funny because, again, grammar is subjective here. 00:20:06.014 --> 00:20:10.875 We've had an increasing informal dropping of L Y suffixes, the turning of 00:20:10.875 --> 00:20:13.335 adverbs into adjectives, and vice versa. 00:20:13.514 --> 00:20:14.655 We've had this mixture. 00:20:15.075 --> 00:20:19.560 And it's not grammatically incorrect if you're trying to connote this 00:20:19.740 --> 00:20:21.870 hustle vibe or like, let's get going. 00:20:21.930 --> 00:20:22.290 Yeah. 00:20:22.500 --> 00:20:26.730 I think the name of the podcast works for the feel you're trying to create. 00:20:26.790 --> 00:20:29.100 If you think smarter, you know, 00:20:29.100 --> 00:20:30.300 Matt Abrahams: Smartly or whatever. 00:20:30.300 --> 00:20:30.570 Yeah. 00:20:30.575 --> 00:20:32.460 Adam Aleksic: It, it doesn't have the same vibe. 00:20:32.490 --> 00:20:34.290 And different ways of speaking, have different vibes. 00:20:34.320 --> 00:20:35.365 So I think you're totally fine. 00:20:35.795 --> 00:20:37.565 And it's grammatically correct for what you're trying to do. 00:20:37.865 --> 00:20:38.435 Matt Abrahams: Excellent. 00:20:38.555 --> 00:20:43.025 The high school English teacher that I had, who is upset about the way we 00:20:43.025 --> 00:20:46.955 named the podcast, I'm gonna send this clip to him so he can understand it. 00:20:46.955 --> 00:20:50.345 But again, I think your answer shows that the language we use, the words 00:20:50.345 --> 00:20:52.115 we use, convey more than just meaning. 00:20:52.115 --> 00:20:54.995 They convey a feeling, a sense, a vibe, as you said. 00:20:55.505 --> 00:20:59.315 Question number two, who is a communicator that you admire and why? 00:21:00.005 --> 00:21:02.465 Adam Aleksic: I interview a lot of different educational creators in the 00:21:02.465 --> 00:21:08.295 book, and I think these people are in a unique position, because you have 00:21:08.295 --> 00:21:11.265 this desire to communicate something and let people know more about this 00:21:11.265 --> 00:21:13.635 topic, but at the same time, we're heavily constrained by this medium. 00:21:13.635 --> 00:21:16.725 You've always needed attention to educate people. 00:21:16.725 --> 00:21:19.815 A teacher still needs to get her students' attention because that's 00:21:19.815 --> 00:21:21.315 how you like hold the floor, right? 00:21:21.315 --> 00:21:23.535 Otherwise, the students will be distracted. 00:21:24.075 --> 00:21:27.975 However, educational content creators are faced with that unique sort of 00:21:27.975 --> 00:21:32.115 need to create edutainment, and I'm very impressed with, especially, the 00:21:32.115 --> 00:21:35.095 early people who had to figure out this space, the Green Brothers, Vsauce. 00:21:35.115 --> 00:21:37.065 I think they've done incredible work in that regard. 00:21:37.425 --> 00:21:39.555 Matt Abrahams: This ability to get attention and sustain 00:21:39.555 --> 00:21:43.155 attention, I define engagement as sustained attention, is critical. 00:21:43.305 --> 00:21:45.735 Adam Aleksic: To me, engagement is a dirty word just because it's like 00:21:45.735 --> 00:21:48.315 algorithmic social media kind of a word, but you're absolutely right. 00:21:48.555 --> 00:21:50.835 Matt Abrahams: Long before these algorithms existed, I've been teaching 00:21:50.835 --> 00:21:53.534 this notion of engagement and I'm happy to use a synonym, but there's 00:21:53.534 --> 00:21:56.445 a need to not only get attention, but to keep that attention and 00:21:56.445 --> 00:21:58.274 whatever we call that is important. 00:21:58.620 --> 00:21:59.700 Final question for you. 00:21:59.909 --> 00:22:04.139 What are the first three ingredients that go into a successful communication recipe? 00:22:04.379 --> 00:22:06.720 Adam Aleksic: I'm a little biased by what, everything I've just said. 00:22:07.050 --> 00:22:10.169 The first ingredient is just being aware, knowing what the 00:22:10.169 --> 00:22:11.820 rules are for each social setting. 00:22:12.240 --> 00:22:14.910 Knowing what the background is of the words you're using. 00:22:15.090 --> 00:22:18.150 Being aware is just step one always for me. 00:22:18.360 --> 00:22:21.420 Step two is know the exact setting that you're in. 00:22:21.420 --> 00:22:23.550 Now you know how these words are used across settings. 00:22:23.790 --> 00:22:26.460 Now you know what setting you're in, and then communicate 00:22:26.460 --> 00:22:27.780 conscientiously based on that. 00:22:27.990 --> 00:22:30.030 Step three, continue observing, become more aware. 00:22:30.120 --> 00:22:31.710 It's just a cycle. 00:22:31.710 --> 00:22:34.170 It's, we're performing our own awareness into existence as well. 00:22:34.380 --> 00:22:38.360 Matt Abrahams: So really it boils down to being open and aware, to seeing 00:22:38.360 --> 00:22:41.600 what's going on, and then make conscious choices to the language you use. 00:22:41.600 --> 00:22:44.180 Adam Aleksic: And then you can sort of reflexively respond to what's going on. 00:22:44.270 --> 00:22:46.310 Continuously, I think reevaluating our state in the world, 00:22:46.310 --> 00:22:48.260 because here's the thing about language, it's always changing. 00:22:48.470 --> 00:22:52.070 The mediums are also always changing, and unless, we can become complacent, 00:22:52.220 --> 00:22:53.690 it's so easy to become complacent. 00:22:54.110 --> 00:22:55.760 You're like, oh, I figured out how language works. 00:22:55.760 --> 00:22:56.570 This works great. 00:22:56.960 --> 00:22:57.930 And then we have a new medium. 00:22:57.950 --> 00:22:58.820 We have algorithms now. 00:22:58.940 --> 00:23:01.850 We have new words emerging, and you're no longer aware. 00:23:02.169 --> 00:23:03.310 And now you're outta date. 00:23:03.310 --> 00:23:05.050 You're using periods in your text messages. 00:23:05.770 --> 00:23:07.060 Matt Abrahams: I told you I'm gonna stop doing that. 00:23:07.330 --> 00:23:10.719 This idea of awareness allows you to be agile and allows you to adjust 00:23:10.719 --> 00:23:12.010 and adapt, and I appreciate that. 00:23:12.520 --> 00:23:13.659 Adam, this has been fantastic. 00:23:13.659 --> 00:23:15.459 I knew it was gonna be a really interesting journey. 00:23:15.459 --> 00:23:20.165 You helped us understand that it is important to think about our audience. 00:23:20.195 --> 00:23:22.534 The algorithm is one of those audiences. 00:23:22.804 --> 00:23:27.905 This notion that language is a conduit for culture and meaning is very critical. 00:23:28.054 --> 00:23:31.735 I appreciate your time and best of luck on your book, Algospeak. 00:23:32.014 --> 00:23:32.314 Adam Aleksic: Thank you. 00:23:32.314 --> 00:23:33.125 It's so fun talking to you. 00:23:35.614 --> 00:23:37.534 Matt Abrahams: Thank you for listening to another episode of 00:23:37.534 --> 00:23:39.905 Think Fast Talk Smart, the podcast. 00:23:40.084 --> 00:23:43.445 To learn more about language and words, tune into episode 00:23:43.445 --> 00:23:45.114 91 with Valerie Fridland. 00:23:45.784 --> 00:23:51.195 This episode was produced by Katherine Reed, Ryan Campos, and me, Matt Abrahams. 00:23:51.435 --> 00:23:53.085 Our music is from Floyd Wonder. 00:23:53.415 --> 00:23:55.485 With thanks to Podium Podcast Company. 00:23:55.905 --> 00:23:59.205 Please find us on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts. 00:23:59.325 --> 00:24:01.605 Be sure to subscribe and rate us. 00:24:01.845 --> 00:24:04.385 Also follow us on LinkedIn and Instagram. 00:24:04.545 --> 00:24:08.805 And check out fastersmarter.io for deep dive videos, English language 00:24:08.805 --> 00:24:11.025 learning content, and our newsletters. 00:24:11.235 --> 00:24:14.895 Please consider our premium offering for extended Deep Thinks episodes, 00:24:15.165 --> 00:24:21.120 Ask Matt Anythings, and much more at fastersmarter.io/premium.