The dreaded 'You know' scourge ...

In terms of triviality this 'issue' is probably right up there… Even so, I am so irked by the problem, and the fact that it has gone on unabated (not even really acknowledged in the mainstream media in any way) for more than a decade now, that I feel it is time for at least an attempt to raise some sort of broad/public recognition of it. Before all Australian kids acquire the misguided belief that a standard part of public speaking of any kind is to randomly insert the words 'you know' into almost every sentence uttered, sometimes two or three times in the same sentence.

The most recent example I encountered was an interview with someone called Matt Okine on ABC News (aired on 02 November 2019). No doubt some peeps with 'smart TVs' and the like would be able to 'watch this back', retrospectively (I have no such capacity). In this interview the guy says 'you know', almost as often as he takes a breath. It also seems that in some instances, where in normal English dialogue the word 'and' would be used, he instead substitutes in the erroneous phrase 'you know'.

Years ago, when this grating habit was first 'creeping in' to public interviews given by somewhat less confident peeps, it was just a nervous habit that emerged two or three times every couple of minutes. Now though, the problem is getting worse and worse. As well as rendering these speakers impossible to take seriously, it will also eventually have the unfortunate side effect of 'teaching' kids that when public speaking, if you want to sound like 'the peeps on TV', it would be a good idea to randomly/pointlessly insert the words 'you know' into your sentences, at the start, middle, or end, or all three places, often. God help us.

Of course there is also the incessant/pointless use of the word '…, like, …', and the phrase 'do you know what I mean?, (etc.), but by far the biggest and most enduring scourge is this grating ridiculously gratuitous insertion of 'you know', many times per minute, by countless unfortunately afflicted individuals in the public eye. The only way to stop this is to raise awareness of the problem. Those afflicted should not be 'shamed', they should simply be made aware that they have this problem. That alone, I am sure, would be quite enough to prompt them to consciously address their 'public speaking deficit'. The problem with that approach though, is that I can't think of any realistic way that it could be done without highlighting numerous specific examples of it … which will inevitably involve identifying individual 'offenders'…

Soooo, my question is this. Would it be 'bad' or 'mean' of me to start a Youtube Channel called 'YouKnow', in which I posted vids ripped from TV interviews etc., and applied a running 'you know' count with a 'bing' sound and a little cumulative count at the bottom of the screen, every time the interviewee said 'you know'? I will 100% act or not, based entirely on the feedback I get from the OzB peeps here. If the majority think that doing such a thing would be 'bad form' (for any reason), then I will not do it. If The majority think that it would be a justified thing to do though—for the public good/in staunch defense against the desecration of English expression—then I will go ahead and do it.

Poll Options expired

  • 49
    Create the Youtube channel
  • 31
    Do not create the YouTube channel

Comments

  • +1

    " against the desecration of English expression"

    I am dead against the bastardisation of 100% fair dinkum australian english/slang etc and the use of by useless imported words like :issue: you aint got an :issue: sunshine you have a problem…

    issue in australian english means the latest copy of new idea etc that mum buys. [although there may be obscure use of the word in a legal sense in a court case or planning for a court case etc]… legalese..

    its not an issue that your internet is slow/or the cat shat on the carpet… it is a problem…

    fair go ocker

    • No.

      Definition of issue:
      a subject or problem that people are thinking and talking about:

      https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/issue

      https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/issue

      As for the rant above, it's a non-issue.

    • +1

      Yo Groggers…

      Chuckle… I am RIGHT INTO all of those sorts of English expression hombre… I LOVE slang, the Aussie vernacular, rhyming slang, all that shite …

      But, you know, I hate mindless nervous insertions into, you know, verbal responses that detract from, you know, or 'cloud' the intended message … you know?

  • +11

    Can I have my time back that it took to read that post? Please?

    There's always been words used when people are creating a pause to think, from the basic "umm" to the simple "like" to the more aggravating to OP "y'know". At the end of the day though who cares? There's so many forms of English within the English language that it's just 1 minor thing.

    If you ignore it, then it won't grate on you, and you won't even notice when it happens. You're currently making a conscious effort to hear it every time it occurs. Ignore it. You can't change peoples' language that easily, and I'm sure you have flaws of your own that irk others.

    • Dear BackSpackers… this is not a simple incarnation of 'um' that I am talking about here. I'm guessing you don't watch much TV, OR listen to much radio… That is to your credit.

      Peace out.

      • +2

        Do the Youtube channel.
        There are so many redundant words that people overuse.
        Here are some examples of words that don't mean anything and are useless padding: essentially, like, that, basically, you know, actually.
        I'm sure there are others too. 'That' is to a lesser extent but it can be used redundantly.
        Spaceback is right in saying it's okay to use redundant words sometimes to allow a sentence to flow instead of pausing to think, but it's easy to pick up a habit of repeating one of these words very frequently without realising it's completely useless.

        "You know" specifically is used when someone is having difficulty describing something and is confessing this as a courtesy to the other party.
        That way it gives them a chance to say if they did know or not. So it has a use (all of the words I listed do) but it can be overused.

        • If someone outlines a concept/idea/proposition, then, makes eye contact while asking '… you know?', then actually waits for a response from their listener, of course that is perfectly legitimate. The phrase is now almost never used in this way though. I found another illustrative example, and this one has the 'BING' :)

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDJC8yerHko

          If anyone else finds any good ones, particularly from Australia, I'd be grateful if you posted a link in this thread…

    • +2

      You obviously weren’t going to use that time for anything else… you know…

      • +1

        Like, anything else you know like?

    • +1

      You have entered some sort of twilight zone, with the unholy trilogy of AlienC, IVI and Narlynucs all posting around the same time. Beware.

  • +1

    less confident peeps

    Sounds like you're less than confident yourself. Why do you need OzBargain's approval to do a YouTube video or not? If OzBargainers were smart enough to make money from YouTube videos they wouldn't be OzBargainers. OzBargainers are mainly good at penny pinching and not much else.

    You know

    This goes hand in hand with upward inflection way of speaking where every sentence becomes a question because people are afraid of sharing disagreeable opinions.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWLhdxtKKp8

    • Why do you need OzBargain's approval to do a YouTube video or not?

      I am trying to ascertain whether a larger sample of Australians than just myself (n = 1) would think it would be a fair/reasonable thing to do. I personally think it would be, but I am happy to stand corrected on that, by a majority of my peers. It's not a 'confidence' issue at all. But yes, I am a quivering and skittish bundle of nerves almost the entire time… how did you know? ;P

      • A sample size of n > 1 is of course better than n = 1 but remember that if you were to ask the question "should I invest in bitcoin" many years ago back when it was new, the "majority of your peers" would have said no.

        Invest in bitcoin or not. You win the profits or you wear the gains.
        Make "you know" YouTube videos. You win the virals or you get 10 views.

        If you think you have a good idea then you do you, F what OzBargain or anyone else thinks IMO.

        Also, here's an interviewer saying "so you're saying" nth times to Jordan P: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-rE03PGQfA

        • Make "you know" YouTube videos. You win the virals or you get 10 views.

          You're missing the point entirely DMP. I am asking my peers whether they think it is a FAIR thing to do… i.e., for the peeps who will feature in the vids. In a none too flattering light. I am not asking OzBers about how 'successful' they think such a YouTube post would be in terms of views, etc

          Or am I misunderstanding something you are saying in this regard?

          • +1

            @GnarlyKnuckles: I was under the impression that this was about success of videos by pointing out an annoying thing (you know) rather than the moralities of targeting someone. Seems like the other repliers in this thread have completely ignored or not noticed that aspect of the topic but re-reading the last paragraph I can see what you're asking now.

            Anyway, if it's a public figure I don't see why not morally speaking. I gave an example above. The main thing might be copyright strikes.

            • @DeafMutePretender: OK, to clarify… My aim is to highlight the issue/problem, and I am not the least bit concerned about the 'success' of a YouTube video in any other sense (number of 'hits' etc.). I am thinking that if there was a YouTube vid/channel wherein numerous interviewees who peppered almost every sentence of their responses with a ridiculous number of 'you knows' featured, with a 'BING-count', then future interviewees would rapidly decide that perhaps they would not want to end up featuring on that YouTube vid/channel. They might then make a conscious effort to abandon this extremely annoying habit, which is unfortunately getting worse and worse. This grating linguistic habit is currently 'snow-balling' completely unchecked. I can think of no other way to curb it.

              Re the copyright issue, I don't think that would be relevant as long as I stuck to footage that was well and truly in the public domain from the moment it was aired; such as interviews on high-end news channels, etc. Would you agree with that? Thank you kindly for your input, by the way.

  • -1

    After a bit of searching, I found a YouTube vid that illustrates the problem I am alluding too quite well!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9WCPxDYBjg

    While watching it/listening to it, try to remember that completely unlike a 'nervous filler' nonsense word such as 'um', the words 'you know' are actually supposed to have a meaning in context. As in, 'You know, and I know, that values differ in different regions' or 'Did you know that the average size is less than 4 inches?' or 'Do you know who did it?', or 'How do you know?' etc. How/why these two words inexplicably came to be completely erroneously used in place of 'um' (or 'er', etc.) by interviewees is a mystery of epic proportions. I have a theory though…

    I am guessing that somewhere, quite a long time ago, some 'PR manager' of a sports star or the like noticed that their charge sounded like a real idiot during interviews, because during the inevitable pause they required every few seconds to conjure up a response, they would 'fill in' with the word 'um'. That manager might have advised their (possibly not 'intellectually gifted') charge to at least use a 'real word/s' instead… and thus, 'you know' was misappropriated as a synonym for 'um', forever more…

    I bet that's how it happened.

    I suppose I should comment on what peeps who have this 'diarrhea-like you know' affliction should say instead of 'you know', when they are being interviewed (or just conversing with someone). The answer of course, is nothing. They should simply pause for a second or two, and contemplate carefully what they say next. No one ever comes across as unintelligent because they take a second or two before they speak. Quite the opposite in fact. Conversely, it seems that unfortunately the standard interview for many in the public eye these days consists of a rehearsed series of half sentences or short complete sentences, 'joined' with the words 'you know' slotted in subconsciously between every one. Nauseating to listen to, and a sad indictment on the human race!

    • Your examples are a different context "did you know" and "I went to talk to this girl, you know" clearly have two different meanings.
      Adding "you know" is making an implication, it's an addition to the rest of the sentence rather than the core of it.

      Is English even your native language?

      • Is English even your native language?

        Nah, herb-man.. I'm an Inuit. I grew up in a freakin' igloo…

  • +3

    You're worrying too much about something that is, you know, unimportant.

    • I'm not so much 'worried' (I have much more 'worrying' things to worry about) as I am annoyed. Instead of sitting back and hearing this problem get worse and worse year on year, totally unabated, I'd like to raise a bit of awareness about it somehow … i.e. actually at least attempt to do something about it. It's very easy to shrug and say 'mmmyeah, it's annoying, but what evs, just get over it/pretend it isn't happening dude, you're worrying to much, it's unimportant'.

      To my mind that is a lazy and fatalistic attitude.

  • +1

    Youtubeis full of crackpots a d crazies, sounds like you'd fit right in. D'yer no wot i meen?

  • +1

    100% the YouTube channel, would subscribe in a heartbeat.
    The main problem with ‘ya-know’ is that IF WE KNEW YOUR VIEWS ALREADY, WE WOULDN'T HAVE ASKED !

  • Before you lose it, I use the 'do you know what I mean' phrase, and that is in part from picking it up through my senior colleagues over time. If giving instructions to a junior it's a way of reinforcing your instruction to the listener. I can tell you that it makes sense to us it in this instance as it then gives you as the instructor confidence that the person you are telling the instruction to understands what the task is. It's good for when your trying to teach something new to someone as it also gives the student a chance to say actually no I don't understand and can you repeat that. So there is legitimate excuse to use that phrase.

    All in context. If your just dropping it in for the sake of it with no context to the presentation or interview then it shouldn't be used. The young folk also use the word 'random', and the 'um' is coming back.

    • '… as it then gives you as the instructor confidence that the person you are telling the instruction to understands what the task is.'

      Do you actually make eye contact after you say 'you know?', and wait for an affirmative or a negative response? If you do not, then I suggest that in fact what you are experiencing is entirely false/baseless confidence/self assurance in this context. Just because you drop in a 'you know' after you have aired some concept or instruction, unless you actually wait for a response from the listener, that in itself has no bearing whatsoever on whether they actually do know (i.e. 'understand') or not. In a group setting for example, do I understand that you are saying that if you explain some concept or issue an instruction, then you drop in 'you know', and no one says anything, that you henceforth assume that everyone in your audience has understood what you have just attempted to explain to them? That would be an extremely misguided assumption, for a whole lot of reasons.

      • @GnarlyKnuckles I only ever use it on a 1 to 1 basis, not in a group situation as it would be pointless as you say as no one will usually speaks up if they don't understand due to the environment of not wanting to stand out. It is affective if you want a task done and when it isn't you can then remind that staff member your conversation in which they did acknowledge their understanding. You can then reinforce how important it is to ensure they understand the instruction to enable the task to be completed properly.

    • Thanks for posting this foggy socks! It's very illustrative of my basic point.

      • +1

        Just trying to help out, you know what I mean?

  • I would have added a comma after "In terms of triviality" but then I do like my commas.

    Ps:If you had no faults, you would not take so much pleasure in noting those of others.

    • '… If you had no faults …'

      What on earth gave you the impression that I think I have no faults? I am utterly baffled as to why you would 'drop' such a ludicrous comment into this thread. Would you care to enlighten me?

      • +1

        Well, you know…

  • +2

    You know, I think you've hit on something here. And when you get this many responses this quickly, you know you're onto something.

  • Would adding some hot sauce to my coffee make these new breeds of threads easier to understand?

    • Quite possibly. For peeps made of stern stuff, a bit of hot sauce makes anything easier to swallow.

  • +3

    It could be worse… " I was like " " and they were like " you know?

  • +3

    Actually, I literally get like what you're talking about… You know.

  • It's even worse when your doctor does it.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFfTludf0SU

    • LOLOL, that's a hilarious clip morts! Cheers!

      Is the whole movie worth watching, or is this the only real side-splitting scene in it?

      • Yeah the the whole thing is, like, totally worth watching, you know? Especially the hospital scene of which that clip was only 1 part. It's not for little kids but everyone else needs to see that documentary. It can be summed up in one phrase "It's funny cos it's true."

        Here's another clip of the US president of the day, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDGGZpAmZr4

  • +1

    The dreaded 'You know' scourge …
    In terms of triviality this 'issue' is probably right up there… Even so, I am so irked by the problem

    What the hell are you talking about?
    No, I don't know what scourge.

    • Chuckle, I see what you did there. Quite clever.

      (but you forgot to insert a comma after the word 'know', and a question mark at the end… which would have made the gag 'work' linguistically)

  • Well you know, its like just one of those things ya know? It cant ya know be helped, how would you ya know go about ya know helping people to ya know get right.

    • +1

      '… how would you … (etc.)'

      With a YouTube video highlighting the increasing problem.

  • +2

    A big Yeah Nah from me

  • Fair dinkum cobber

  • What the (profanity) did I just read, I've found the weird part of OzB again…

    Correcting a word to "(Profanity)"?? Surely OzB mods understand that Language is just a construct of the human imagination, nothing has meaning, words don't have meaning, we imagine they do which is why etymology exists.
    So backwards…

    • Sure, but they don't have a hope for the grand final. :)

  • I work with a bloke who said" You know what I mean." every second sentence when he's trying to make a point.
    Yeah mate, I know what you mean.

  • Once you become aware of little quirks like this you can't help but hear it all the time.

    It was pointed out to me some time ago that many Australians put "you know" into every second sentence, and since then I can't help but hear it all the damn time.

    Same how many women also add an upwards inflection at the end of almost every sentence. Once you become aware of it you hear it all the time.

    Adam Hills did a great sketch on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpBYnL5fAXE

  • Are you allowed to use 'you know' if you know the entire audience actually knows what you're talking about?

  • Like, I think the word "like" is a bigger problem than "you know". Like, everybody is using like nowadays, like give me a break. Like, they use it so much it makes me like, furious. Especially, like, girls who like drive into like, maximum-gossip-overdose and they like, make sure to shout throughout the whole train of like breaking up with their boyfriend, like it's a big drama.
    Like, stop it, nobody is enjoying it you know!

    P.S. I am waiting for a link to your YOuTube channel.

  • +1

    "You know"
    "Like"
    "Um/er/ah/erm"

  • +1

    Nothing a course of Toastmasters couldn't fix 😉

  • It is so much worse when they make eye contact with you and expect you to acquiesce with whatever nonsense they are spouting.

    Like , you know what I mean , right?…Right?! …I mean, you know, right? All men are chauvinistic pigs , right? They're trying to break my b@lls, right? Like , you know what I mean?….Yes? ….Do you know what I mean? You know, right? I mean , unless , you're one of them, right? It's literally true, right? Like , you know what I mean? Right? F**k Patriarchy , right? Like you know what I mean … like , just because I'm young and pretty, right? ..Right? …RIGHT! It doesn't mean they can literally break my b@lls, right? Like , literally! Like WTF , man? Like literally! That's crazy, right? You know what I mean…

    -Purple-haired and pierced female uni student sitting across from me on the train to me , while I'm nodding non-noncommittally at her and wondering how do you "literally" break someone's imaginary b@lls ? 🤨

  • +1

    Yikes!

  • Go ahead and do it, nobody will care lol. It's only natural speech patterns. There are extreme examples of course, but there are always such examples of everything. Focus on something more important, like people stupidly using 'of' instead of 'have'.

  • Until I saw your username i figured this was a post by a certain other well known OzBargainer…

  • Love a good First World problem.

    Yep, create your YouTube channel. While you're at it, also create ones dedicated to written communication that:

    • is unnecessarily long
    • overuses single quotes, bold and italics.

    Oh, and http://www.hemingwayapp.com/ :P

    • Love a good First World problem.

      The phrase 'first world problem' is one that I have never quite understood the core meaning of, Mr Pain. Perhaps you can explain it to me. Usually it is aired in a manner/context that suggests that peeps who live in the 'first world' (whatever that may be defined as) have no 'right' to air their problems/concerns/thoughts at all… because they happen to be lucky enough not to be living in a 'developing country'.

      Do I have your intended meaning correct there MP, or am I entirely wrong about it? If you did not mean that, please shed a bit more light on your personal definition of 'First World problem', and whether or not peeps who have one are ever 'allowed' to mention such problems … in your opinion. The fact is that I live in what I suppose could only be objectively classified as a 'first world' country. Surely though, that does not mean that I am never allowed to air any problems/concerns/etc. that I perceive exist in the 'first world'…? Or is that in fact what you are suggesting?

      I eagerly await your opinions on the above.

  • +1

    The "you know" thing is definitely a pet peeve of mine also, to the extent that if I'm having a conversation with someone and they say "you know" inappropriately, I will stop them right then and there and tell them that, "No, I don't know, because you haven't told me anything useful yet!"

    • +1

      Good for you dcash. If I think the person who is speaking to me can handle it/will not get upset, I do exactly the same thing too! (almost… I simply ask them to stop saying 'you know' every few seconds).

      It is interesting to watch strong-willed/self-aware peeps continue to talk thereafter, pausing for a few milliseconds as they realise they have this little linguistic problem, and it literally 'heals' as they speak… The amazing thing is, peeps who have this problem generally only need to be made aware of it once; then they start 'self-checking', and they stop doing it. This is one of the reasons why I think it would actually be a bit mean to compile a YouTube video of peeps in the public eye doing it, in order to raise broader awareness of the problem/scourge/put a stop to it in the mainstream. Aah, the moral dilemma… it's angst…

      • +1

        You're right in that once someone is made aware of it, they'll generally try to keep it in check. It's really no different to kids being told to stop staying "like" or "umm" when doing a speech at school or suchlike. The purpose is to better them; not belittle them. Why would we want kids to improve, but not adults? I'm always happy for someone to call me out on something, but as you suggest, not everyone can handle a little constructive criticism ;)

  • +1

    I agree wholeheartedly with your post. YouTube away…

  • This is a "hesitation marker", OP, and you probably have your own that you may not even notice.

    • 'You know' is absolutely not a 'hesitation marker' in the way it is now used, in the true sense. It is now an 'insecurity marker', a nervousness marker, a 'script' marker, etc; but definitely not a 'hesitation marker'. It is in fact quite the opposite of a 'hesitation marker. It is dropped into conversation or an interview when someone is seeking to avoid an audible pause (or 'hesitation').

  • DEAR GOD

Login or Join to leave a comment