Yesterday, on BookTV, this Canadian impressed me with some original and very valid seeming observations about what is *really* going on when humans communicate with each other.

Apparently, (doh) we are unconsciously negotiating/confirming/determining status when we communicate, as well as (secondary intention?) "exchanging" ideas or information.

I myself can benefit Darwinoidly (fake humble pose) from incorporating his valuable observations in my nefarious strategies, heheh..

You are invited to get the "upper hand" by actually reading one of this guy's books. I, then, will be provoked to consider escalating.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Pinker#Theories_of_language_and_mind

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stuff_of_Thought

"Pinker argues language provides a window on human nature, and "analyzing language can reveal what people are thinking and feeling." He asserts the idea that language must do two things:

convey a message to an audience, and

negotiate the social relationship between the speaker and the audience. Therefore, language functions at these two levels at all times. For example, a common-place statement such as, "If you could pass the salt, that would be great," functions as both a request (though none is inherent to that statement) and a means of being polite or non-offensive (through not directing the audience to demands). Pinker says of this example:

“ It's become so common that we don't even notice that it is a philosophical rumination rather than a direct imperative. It's a bit of a social dilemma. On the one hand, you do want the salt. On the other hand, you don't want to boss people around lightly. So you split the difference by saying something that literally makes no sense while also conveying the message that you're not treating them like some kind of flunky."[3]