When conversations don’t go as we intended, or when someone misunderstands us, it can be unsettling and upsetting, as well as cause unnecessary conflict or hurt feelings at home or in the workplace.

Given this, I was interested in Shankar Vedantam’s interview with linguist Deborah Tannen in his Hidden Brain podcast, “Why conversations go wrong,” which focuses on how we can learn to talk and listen better.

According to Tannen, when we are speaking with one another, there are many things that can misfire. For instance, “The pace at which you speak, how you get to the point, the rhythms, the intonation patterns [and] humor,” says Tannen. 

From their discussion, I took away three essential tips to improve your interpersonal communication. Here they are:

The first is to be alert and conscious about your and others’ conversational styles. Consider things like preferences for direct or indirect communication, the length of pauses, or whether talking along with someone will be perceived as a sign of enthusiasm, or conversely, an unwanted interruption. Ideally, you want to strive for a shared conversational or speaking style, otherwise you may be perceived as rude.

To explain the differences between direct and indirect communication, Tannen shares the simple example of posing the question: Do you want to stop for a drink? A response of yes or no is direct. Whereas retorting with your own question, such as “What do you want to do?” is indirect.

This is important because, while direct and indirect speech have their unique benefits, differences around preferences can lead to big misunderstandings. This often happens when one party has a preconceived notion of how the other will respond. For instance, if I expect a direct response, I may be confused or annoyed by the ambiguity of an indirect reply.

There may also be cultural differences in how an indirect reply is perceived. Tannen shares an example of a conversation she had with her husband, who is Greek, about his interest in going to a party. He replied in an indirect manner, and she assumed he didn’t want to go to the party, but in fact, the opposite was true. She then designed a study to test how others in Greece would interpret his reply.

Finally, you need to consider the message and the meta message. “The message is the meaning of the words,” she explains. “The meta message is what it says about the relationship.”

For instance, what did our conversation reveal about our position to one another? Did it position one person up and another down? Did it bring us closer or farther apart?

In conversational conflict, it’s often not what is said that upsets us, but it’s about the implication of those words on our relationship.

These are just a few of the key points from this podcast. I highly recommend you listen to it, or check out one of Deborah Tannen’s numerous books: You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation, I Only Say This Because I Love You and Talking from 9 to 5: Women and Men at Work among many other titles.