If they didn’t interrupt you would still be having two conversations since they misunderstood what you were trying to say, but it would take longer to catch on.
I’m talking about situations where my meaning would become clear if I weren’t interrupted before I finished what I was saying.
It’s fine, though. I’m learning to front-load my main points. Instead of trying to say “Hey, I know we said we’d clean the basement this weekend, but I think it’s more important that I spend that time fixing the car,” and getting interrupted with thoughts about the basement before I’m able to mention the car, I try to say “I’d like to work on the car this weekend. I think the basement can wait.” Takes practice, though.
Agree to some extent, but the meaning would only become clear if they continue to listen instead of assuming they know what you’re about to say and zoning out.
I have some of both with my SO and I’m not sure what’s more annoying, being interrupted or explaining exactly what you mean and having none of it be absorbed.
Yeah, leading with the important part so the reat of it has context seems to work a lot better for a lot more people in my experience. Especially in your example where you are trying to front load the thing to do followed by the thing not to do. That way they don’t jump to speculation halfway through the sentence :)
On a somewhat nonscientifically aupported personal observation, if the sentence structure has a ‘but’ in the middle the audience is very likely to start mentally guessing what is coming up and will have more trouble listening to what it being said. It can often sound like a rug pulling moment, where what they thought was true is suddenly switched up and most people don’t like that. So if thinking ahead it is better to reverse a sentence like in that example to avoid the middle ‘but’.
If they didn’t interrupt you would still be having two conversations since they misunderstood what you were trying to say, but it would take longer to catch on.
I’m talking about situations where my meaning would become clear if I weren’t interrupted before I finished what I was saying.
It’s fine, though. I’m learning to front-load my main points. Instead of trying to say “Hey, I know we said we’d clean the basement this weekend, but I think it’s more important that I spend that time fixing the car,” and getting interrupted with thoughts about the basement before I’m able to mention the car, I try to say “I’d like to work on the car this weekend. I think the basement can wait.” Takes practice, though.
Agree to some extent, but the meaning would only become clear if they continue to listen instead of assuming they know what you’re about to say and zoning out.
I have some of both with my SO and I’m not sure what’s more annoying, being interrupted or explaining exactly what you mean and having none of it be absorbed.
Yeah, leading with the important part so the reat of it has context seems to work a lot better for a lot more people in my experience. Especially in your example where you are trying to front load the thing to do followed by the thing not to do. That way they don’t jump to speculation halfway through the sentence :)
On a somewhat nonscientifically aupported personal observation, if the sentence structure has a ‘but’ in the middle the audience is very likely to start mentally guessing what is coming up and will have more trouble listening to what it being said. It can often sound like a rug pulling moment, where what they thought was true is suddenly switched up and most people don’t like that. So if thinking ahead it is better to reverse a sentence like in that example to avoid the middle ‘but’.