Paraphrase
,
paraphrase
,
paraphrase
(from ancient Greek παράφρασις “retelling”) - presentation of the text in your own words.
Paraphrases are different types of processing of a text (in particular, a literary work): a detailed explanation of a short text, an abbreviated presentation of a large text (adaptation), a simplified presentation of a difficult-to-understand text with brief explanations, transposition of prose text into poetry, translation of poetry into prose. A paraphrase can also be called a partial retelling of a text.
A paraphrase is, in particular, a special, educational type of commentary on a theoretical text, which is a presentation of the original close to the text with an explanation. This type of commentary was invented by the ancient Greek commentator on Aristotle, Themistius. His paraphrases were intended to be read in parallel with the corresponding texts of Aristotle.
Examples
As an example of paraphrase-adaptations, we can cite publications of large works of art intended for children: retellings of “A Thousand and One Nights”, “Don Quixote” by M. de Cervantes, “Robinson Crusoe” by D. Defoe, “Gargantua and Pantagruel” by Francois are known Rabelais.
Poetic paraphrase
There is a well-known poetic paraphrase of the Gospel of John, written by the ancient Greek poet Nonnus of Khmim.
An example of poetic paraphrase in Russian literature is numerous poetic transcriptions of psalms, one of the most famous is “Three Paraphrastic Odes” (1743, published 1744). In this book, V.K. Trediakovsky, M.V. Lomonosov and A.P. Sumarokov competed in writing a poetic transcription of the 143rd Psalm to find out which poetic meter is most suitable for works of high “calm”. Lomonosov and Sumarokov rearranged the psalm in iambic, Trediakovsky - in trochaic.
Musical paraphrase
A free-form piece of music written on a musical theme(s) from another author's work, as well as folk melodies. Most often, in a paraphrase, the original is presented in a modified and simplified style, intended for easy comprehension; it may use a number of changes, additions or abbreviations. In classical and academic music, paraphrases place the original theme in new genre or stylistic settings. Paraphrase was often used in 19th-century music as a piano salon genre. Paraphrases by F. Liszt on the themes of works by R. Wagner, P. Tchaikovsky, and folk melodies are known. Modern paraphrases of Vanessa Mae are popular.
Reflective Listening Techniques
A fundamental rule of interpersonal communications is that the meaning of a message as decoded by the recipient never exactly matches the meaning intended by the sender.
Illustrating this rule, Eastwood Atwater talks about a study conducted by graduates of an American university. This study found a large discrepancy between what doctors meant when they spoke to patients and what the latter heard. The doctor's words, “It will hardly hurt you,” were interpreted in a wide range - from aching pain to mild discomfort. In addition, 22% of patients said that for them these words meant “very painful.” Moreover, the phrase “You will be discharged home soon” for about half of the doctors and patients meant “in two to three days,” while the remaining patients understood this phrase as “tomorrow,” and the number of patients who attached this meaning to the message was three times higher more than doctors.
The conclusion that the authors of the study came to was the following: in order for patients to better understand what doctors mean, they need to actively ask and ask again. It is this way of listening that Eastwood Atwater called reflective listening.
Reflective listening consists of establishing feedback between the listener and the speaker. The listener not only listens attentively, but also tells the speaker how he understood him. The speaker evaluates this understanding and, if necessary, makes adjustments to his story, trying to achieve a more accurate understanding of the listener.
Reasons for misunderstanding
What are the reasons why our understanding is inaccurate?
1. The first reason for misunderstanding is the polysemy of most words.
In the statement: “He irritates me by whistling all the time,” the word “whistle” can denote a specific high-frequency sound, but it can also be used in the sense of “deceives.” Exclamation: “What organic!” in the mouth of a director it means praise for the actor’s performance, and in the mouth of a psychologist - a set of symptoms indicating the presence of organic brain damage. Therefore, it can sometimes be difficult to establish what exactly the person who used the word meant without knowing its specific meaning for the speaker himself. The reason lies in the fact that the specific meaning of a word appears in the head of the speaker, but is not contained in the word itself.
In addition, the meaning of a word can change depending on the context in which it is pronounced: “I feel uneasy,” for example, can mean both an upset stomach and mental discomfort, depending on what was discussed before.
If we use reflective listening techniques to clarify the meaning of the words used, for example, we ask him: “What exactly do you mean by saying this?”, most likely the speaker will try to express his thought in other words that are more understandable to us.
2. The second reason for inaccurate understanding is that the speaker deliberately distorts the original meaning of the message. When we communicate to each other our ideas, attitudes, feelings, assessments, so as not to offend anyone or appear in a bad light in the eyes of the interlocutor, we carefully select our words. Sometimes we exaggerate or understate something, and often use ambiguous expressions. No less tricks are taken by people who try to win the sympathy and sympathy of the listener by telling him about the unacceptable behavior of some bad person. For example, the statement: “My neighbor is a moron” most likely does not indicate a clinical diagnosis, but says that our interlocutor is angry with his neighbor. The listener can also use feedback to identify the meaning inherent in an unclear message.
3. The third source of difficulty is the difficulty of open self-expression. This means that, due to conventions and the need for approval, people often begin their presentation with a short introduction that does not yet make their intentions clear. Wanting to talk about something important, a person may start “from afar”, with some problem that is not really his main concern. He's testing the waters before diving into emotionally charged topics. The less self-confidence he has, the more he beats around the bush before getting to the point. Only as he begins to feel safe and understood does he reveal his deeper feelings. Therefore, demonstrating that you understand him will help him get to the point more quickly.
4. Finally, the fourth source of difficulty lies in the subjective meanings of the listener. Each person accumulates a huge number of unique associations associated with various words over the course of his life. Some words evoke negative memories in us, touch a painful point, while the speaker did not put a negative meaning into them. For example, a person who has a beloved dog at home will respond differently to the statement “He acts like a dog” than a person who was recently bitten by a stray dog. By checking whether we have correctly understood the meaning of what we heard, we can overcome the negative influence of our personal associations on the accuracy of perception.
All this points to the need to be able to listen reflexively, that is, to decipher the meaning of messages, to find out their real meaning.
By checking for correct understanding, we simultaneously let the speaker know that what he is saying is important to us. By doing so, we are more actively encouraging him to continue his story. The reflective listening interlocutor assures the speaker that he understood everything said correctly. It seems to tell the speaker: “I accept you, I want to understand your experience, your feelings and especially your needs.”
Any person enjoys being understood. We unconsciously feel sympathy for those who do not condemn us, but, on the contrary, treat us with understanding. Therefore, using reflective listening, we can have a certain influence on the relationship that we develop with our interlocutor.
Reflective Listening Techniques
All of the techniques listed below are united by their focus on simultaneously solving three main problems:
- Check the correctness of your understanding of the words and statements of the speaker.
- Do not control the topic of conversation, but support the spontaneous speech flow of the speaker, help him “get talking,” talk not about what seems important and interesting to us, but about what he considers important.
- Not only to be an interested listener, but also to make the interlocutor feel this interest.
1. Misunderstanding. The first technique aimed at improving mutual understanding looks paradoxical at first glance: it is a demonstration of misunderstanding. It can be helpful to simply state, “I don’t understand what you mean.” At the same time, it is important that the listener be willing to wait for a more accurate transmission of the entire message, maintaining “neutrality” and not expressing irritation or displeasure.
When, while listening to our interlocutor, we do not understand him well, we can honestly and directly say so. The principle that guides the use of this technique is simple: if you don’t understand something, say so. Many people are embarrassed to say that they do not understand something. Often the source of such fears is memories of studying at school. An adult living with such a childish decision will most likely try to hide from others that he does not understand something. He will think things through, pretend to be smart, nod thoughtfully, and thereby mislead his interlocutor. Although, if the interlocutor is interested in being understood, he, faced with misunderstanding, would most likely make an effort to be understood correctly.
2. Reflection (echo). Reflection is the repetition of words or phrases of the interlocutor. It usually takes the form of verbatim repetition or repetition with minor changes. The use of this technique is extremely widespread in psychotherapeutic and counseling practice. One of the apologists of this technique was Carl Rogers.
If the speaker tries to express things that are not entirely clear to himself and receives a reflection (repetition) of his words, and the listener does not change the structure of the statement in any way, does not introduce additional semantic load from himself into it, then what he was trying to express becomes clearer to the speaker.
From each fragment of the speaker's monologue, the listener selects and repeats what, in his opinion, is the central core of the fragment, its quoting beginning, be it an expressed feeling or some idea. In this case, you can change auxiliary or unimportant words appearing in the statement, but all key words that carry a semantic or emotional load must be repeated exactly. The most important point of adequate reflection is the absence of perceptual distortions that may be introduced by the listener.
Reflection should not be used too often, so that your partner does not get the impression that he is being imitated. This technique is most appropriate in situations where the meaning of the interlocutor’s statements is not entirely clear or where his statements carry an emotional charge.
3. Paraphrase (paraphrase). To paraphrase means to formulate the same idea differently. In a conversation, paraphrase consists of conveying to the speaker his own message, but in the words of the listener. The purpose of paraphrasing is for the listener to check the accuracy of his own understanding of the message. Paraphrasing, oddly enough, is useful precisely when the interlocutor’s speech seems understandable to us.
You can begin this technique with the following words:
- “As I understand you, you think that...”;
- “As I understand it, you are talking about the fact that...”;
- “In your opinion...”;
- “You can correct me if I’m wrong, but...”;
- “In other words, you think...”;
- "Do I understand correctly?"
When paraphrasing, it is important to select only the essential, main points of the message, otherwise answering instead of clarifying understanding may cause confusion.
4. Summary. Summarizing is a reformulation technique that is used to summarize not a single phrase, but a significant part of a story or an entire conversation as a whole. The basic rule for formulating a resume is that it should be extremely simple and understandable.
This technique is quite applicable in long conversations, where it helps to organize fragments of conversation into a semantic unity. It gives the listener confidence in accurately perceiving the speaker's message and at the same time helps the speaker understand how well he managed to convey his thoughts.
For example, introductory phrases could be:
- “I listened to you carefully. Let me check if I understood you correctly...” (or: “This is how I understood what happened to you...”);
- “If I now summarize what you said, then...”;
- “From your story I drew the following conclusions...”
Next, in literally two or three phrases, you retell to your partner what he told you for five to ten minutes. At the same time, you note the key moments of its history, but select the most concise form for this.
Summarizing can also be effective in cases where the interlocutor “goes in circles” and returns to what has already been said. This behavior of the narrator is often due to the fact that he fears that he was not understood or misunderstood. By formulating an accurate summary, you show how you understood the part of the interlocutor’s story that you have already heard, and thereby “draw a line.”
During meetings and negotiations, a lengthy discussion of an issue can become overly complicated or even reach a dead end. Summarizing statements will help those discussing not to waste a lot of time reacting to superficial, distracting remarks from their interlocutors, distracting themselves from discussing the content of the problem itself.
5. Clarification. If previous reflective listening techniques have not led the listener to a clear understanding, he can directly ask the speaker to clarify an unclear part in his story, give examples, or elaborate on something. This reflective listening technique can be called clarification (or clarification). Clarification is asking the speaker for clarification so that the listener understands more precisely what is being said.
To get additional facts or clarify the meaning of certain statements, the listener can say something like the following:
- “Will you say it again?”;
- "What do you have in mind?"
Such remarks encourage the person to clarify what he just talked about. If you understand the general meaning of the statement, but need additional details to clarify the situation, you can contact the speaker with a direct request to expand the answer:
- “Could you please explain in more detail?”;
- “Perhaps you could add something?..”;
- “Could you develop your idea?..”;
- “What happened then?..”
Such a request can be retrospective, that is, it returns your interlocutor to a topic that was heard earlier, but was not sufficiently disclosed: “You said that ... Could you tell us more about this?”
***
Reflective listening guidelines may seem deceptively simple at first, but once they are used, they are not so easy to use correctly. At first, the proposed techniques may seem inconvenient, pretentious, and artificial. Over time, as you use them regularly in practice, you will gain the necessary experience and learn to listen reflectively in a simple and natural way.
Using comprehension listening techniques is time-consuming but has significant benefits because we perceive rational speech inaccurately more often than we think.
