Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
providing internal links |
|||
Line 150:
:::::But "willfully obtuse" or "deliberately obtuse" would work if you want to use that word. --[[Special:Contributions/65.94.50.4|65.94.50.4]] ([[User talk:65.94.50.4|talk]]) 23:43, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
{{resolved}}
"playing dumb!" is how that sentence would end! (Based on your description). "I talked to him for 12 minutes about this very simple concept, but he still didn't get it. I am now suspecting that he was just playing dumb", though it doesn't make much sense to me. Why would anyone talk to someone for 12 minutes if they didn't seem to understand something? It sounds far more likely that it's a really complicated subject like advanced physics or whatever, and there is just some kind of mental missing step or hurdle, something the listener genuinely didn't get. In my experience people rarely actually play dumb and it's far more likely that someone really is missing something. Nobody plays dumb to be annoying. That would get awkward really fast. In these cases simplification helps. Use simple sentences. Break things down. It might seem like you're being patronizing, but 90% you'll actually solve the communications impasse and end the frustration, or identify the communications gap between speaker and listener, at least if you're eliciting some feedback. "Well, look, do you know what a kumquat is?" and they will blush and admit they don't, even though you took it for granted that they did and you have been trying to explain your kumquat refrigerator pie recipe for 12 minutes. (they thought it's some fruit that is inside like apple pie, didn't have a mental picture of a kumquat, which is like a little baby orange.) problem solved. [[Special:Contributions/212.96.61.236|212.96.61.236]] ([[User talk:212.96.61.236|talk]]) 00:30, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
== [[hydroponics]], [[hydroculture]], huh? ==
| |||