Information Elements and Speech Patterns

[hag]

.

[Bertrand]

what is this based on

is this just the audio equivalent of VI

[Bertrand]

I'm sure there's something to it, "talking from" certain functions is like letting that function control motor output, which is what the brain does, so it makes sense you could concentrate it down a bit to specific functions and just the vocal channel. there may be a signal to noise ratio where pure functions are never fully isolated and therefore always mixed, so what would happen is Ti + Ne would come across differently than Ti + Se. in fact it seems almost absurd to talk of a single function only in a voice, but what is meant is a function that conspicuously predominates. in this way it would be sort of like DarkAngelFireWolf69's examples of demonstrative states. the number one hurdle as I see it wouldn't be isolating patterns but linking them correctly and consistently to the proper function. for example one person says x is Fe the other person says the same thing is Fi, or worse, an entire group develops a consensus its Fe when its not. this is why there needs to be a strong theoretical basis. otherwise everyone is just throwing out their personal anecdotes into a chaotic swirl amounting to noise. anchoring is a thing so you end up with the posted chart mind controlling everyone, so it needs to be questioned and justified. people are quick to get in line with their anecdotes and further spiral things off in whatever direction. pretty soon 16 types becomes the 16 types with reference to adam strange

[Bertrand]

yeah in other words be a pioneer who conducts their own research for years and then pre-empt any criticisms by having built in answers to all of them up front. thus you stand a good chance of surviving the acid test when it comes and if you're still standing after all is said and done, maybe it will catch on and become baseline for others to use as a starting point. or just surround yourself with ignorant people who lack critical intelligence and live in a bubble

[wasp]

if type can manifest itself via written expression ("cognitive styles" + silke's article) then i don't see why it can't manifest itself via verbal expression


i do think there is some truth to this (i feel like 4d Fe is really hard to miss) and i think we could account for the differences between kindred types by combining two functions to create a slightly altered style of verbal expression - like they're 60 parts "this" and 40 parts "that" - but i feel like you could probably take it a step further by extrapolating a unique style of verbal expression for each individual sociotype based on the aforementioned chart. generally speaking i think base intuitives have a harder time expressing themselves (which is truer for irrational subtypes than rational subtypes + it's truer for Ni > Ne) and there's an inherent vagueness to their style of speech that breeds a "wispy" quality - which manifests as verbally following a vague trail (Ni) or verbally hopping across random points on a web (Ne) so their speech patterns are naturally less grounded because they're always checking in and out of "reality". the opposite would be true for sensors - Si would be similar to Ni sans haziness + Se would be similar to Ne sans haziness (but of course this varies wildly depending on the combination of functions - this is just a simplification)

(i refreshed the thread & it looks like bertrand already addressed the first half but if i remove it then my autistic ramble will make 80% less sense)

i think this idea is implicitly addressed in various socionics literature, like quadras include a vague description of how social environments comprised of members from [quadra] might play out in real life i.e. if you bring what you say to an emotional middle-ground (delta) then your self-expression is going to be more composed, but if you're inclined to increase the intensity of what you say (beta) then your self-expression is going to be more extravagant. it's just that the degree in which you're "composed" or "extravagant" would depend on various other factors (i.e. temperament) and there's another article that addresses the differences between irrationality vs rationality + intuitives vs sensors in self-expression

for example, i think there's a grain of truth to seemingly silly stereotypes such as "deltas don't swear" but how we come to these conclusions is iffy - yet if you consider that deltas don't like things that threaten their physical and/or psychological well-being, then it makes sense that "swearing" might fall under that broad category. i don't think it's swearing in and of itself, so much as it is what might've caused the swearing in the first place, and the byproduct of swearing, especially if it's directed outwardly (@ another person) instead of a simple expression of irritation ("oh shit i dropped my nachos") has lasting effects which might come back around in the future. i'm mostly thinking of Si as a standalone function while i type this because i think it's partially why Si-egos dislike aggression in themselves, which may manifest as a calm disposition, which i was going to connect to Si = calm speech patterns

the only significant issue i have with VI is that we search for the the wrong similarities (similar facial expressions =/= similar facial features) + the official VI examples we're given via russian sources usually only use white Russians as examples, but since each ethnicity comes with their own slightly (or significantly) different dominant features then we have a harder time placing them anywhere with accuracy. we'd probably need to expand on preexisting examples to account for ethnic variations. there's probably a similar drawback with speech patterns in the sense that some languages are naturally more expressive or structured or simplistic than other languages, but how an individual chooses to express themselves via any given language still bears insight into their sociotype - it's just that we're less capable of noticing these subtle distinctions if we don't understand the language in question

i got lectured for my stream-of-consciousness vents before (rightfully so because it is a maze sometimes) but tl;dr the idea behind that chart is neat

[Bertrand]

stream of consciousness is good not bad

[Tallmo]

Interesting

One thing Ive noticed is that some LIEs tend to speak fast and have sloppy articulation. As if the underlying language pattern is more important than the actual production of words.

[photon]

I'd like to an example of the Ni one because I have no idea wtf that means as a speech pattern.

Also those are cognitive functions not the IEs