A reader writes:
I listen to you all the time on the radio Q&A. This is my own fabulous opinion, meaning you don’t have to pay it any attention:
I think you’ll sound better if instead of saying "mmm-hmm" while callers set up their question, you say "yes," or "continue," or some other words. Mmm-hmm is what I say when I don’t really want to be listening to what someone is saying (especially my kids)….I don’t know if listeners take it that way or not.
BTW, I have a question which I can’t phone in since I hear you taped, maybe you could answer it on the air:
In the pre V2 days the Mass was divided into the Mass of the Catechumens and the Mass of the Faithful; today it’s the Liturgy of the Word and Liturgy of the Eucharist.
Any ideas why this changed, and what is the point of the new terminology?
First, in regard to the question: I don’t have a firm answer from an official document explaining why the change was done. A check of the cumulative index of the BCL Newsletter and some leafing around in the 1969 issues didn’t turn anything up (though further digging might); neither did a check of Documents on the Liturgy (a standard collection), but my sense is that the terminological change was due to two things:
First, the custom of the ancient church of dismissing the catechumens at the end of the liturgy of the word had fallen out of use (at least in the Latin rite). Consequently, retaining the terminology was more confusing than not. By calling the rite "the liturgy of the word," it mede it more clear what the true purpose of the rite was.
Second, there was a desire to more greatly stress the unity of the Mass and the relevance to of the word to the Eucharist.
That’s my sense, anyway. If someone else has more specific information (and can quote a source), I hope they’ll add it in the comments box.
Now, regarding the mmmm-hmmm issue: After you’ve worked in radio for a while, you get an inbuilt instinct that dead air must be avoided at all costs, and so I use "mmmm-hmmmm" to fill dead air sometimes. I try to say it supportively, to indicate that I’m listening attentively to what the person says (and, in some cases, to hurry the caller up if he’s rambling), but I don’t know how it comes across to listeners, especially when it goes through the filtering process that causes some of my inflection to drop out.
"Yes" or "continue" would sound impatient to my ears, but I could be wrong.
Whadda y’all think?
I think the “mmmm-hmmmm” comes off just fine. I gives an air of approachability that other, more formal expressions (like “continue”) might not convey.
Relatedly, IMHO it’s this approachability (coupled with your expertise, of course) that makes you such an effective radio apologist.
Aaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhh,well.
Mmmmmm-Hmmmmm is fine, although sometimes what appears to be impatience does come through over the airwave. Don’t get me wrong, you do a great job.
tim robles
I think “mmmm-hmmmm” works extremely well in this context. Especially when talking on the phone, (and broadcast on radio!) and the usual visual clues are eliminated, specific words like “yes” or “continue” can sound like the host is interrupting the caller. I’ve actually trained myself to “mmm-hmmm” talking on the phone with friends, precisely because I do have a tendency to interrupt. It encourages the speaker to continue train of thought until completed.
Mmmmmm-Hmmmmm sounds fine to me, although a shorter version, just Mmm-Hmm, might sound more neutral. But “continue” sounds awful to me, far too directive and condescending.
I think the fact that this is what we are reduced to critiquing Jimmy about says a lot more about how great a job he is doing, than it does about any perception that he isn’t listening to his callers. Let’s get real, if he wasn’t listening, how could he answer the question to begin with?
I think the Mmmmmm-Hmmmmm is fine. “Yes” would be ok, as long as the tone was patient and thoughtful. I don’t think “continue” would work.
Really, I think most words would be fine, as long as the tone is respectful. Which, of course, it always is. 🙂
The scary thing (for me) is when I’m not listening.
Sometimes I’m reading the screen to see what questions are coming up or Jerry is giving me some kind of signal (e.g., which line we’re going to take next, how many minutes are left in the show) and I suddenly realize that I’ve missed a crucial piece of information in what the caller is saying.
Sometimes I’m able to start answering the question in general terms and then work backwards to take care of the missing piece of information.
Other times, there’s nothing for it but “I’m sorry, I missed that,” which you never want to say if you can avoid it because it makes the caller repeat stuff (sometimes a whole, big long question), and that’s bad radio.
As they say up here in New England, aaaaayuuuuaaaaah…..
Mmmm-hmmm is better than “yes” and “continue”. It’s a non-intrusive acknowledgement which is how Jimmy uses it.
I think your mmmm hmmm comes off exactly the way you mean it to. Supportive – “I am listening…”
Um . . . maybe I’m not listening but I’ve never noticed the “mmmmm-hmmmm” before. I’m sure I’ve heard you say it becuase I listen all the time, but since I can’t hear it in my head (like I can your use of “dudn’t” – which I think is cool; it’s just not a Jimmy Akin show if you don’t say “dudn’t”) I may be that it simply doesn’t regster with me because it’s that natural for you & doesn’t stand out as obviously positive or negative to me. So, long may you “mmmmm-hmmmm”!
Of course, now it’ll be all I hear when I listen to you from now on!
The mmmmm-hmmmm’s vary. I can distinguish four at least:
1. “I am listening, continue.”
2. Questioning or curious.
3. “Hurry things along, please.”
4. “This line of thinking is going to a very bad place!”
I do the mmmm-hmmm thing too as I also tend to interrupt people. 🙁
I’ve only listened to you twice, via your links here, so i’m probably not exactly qualified to give my opinion…but that never stopped me before, so;
1. When listening to you for those two shows, which equates to something like 2 hours (i think), I do remember thinking “Oh, he sounded a bit ‘short’ with that person”
…i don’t want to offend you, and it might be because i’m a Brit and you’re an American and I am misunderstanding the way that other Americans receive you.
2. I dig your humerous streak, you are especially funny when you don’t try so hard.
God Bless.
Jimmy, I propose that you continue saying “mmmmmm – hmmmmm” however you say it like Karl on the movie Slingblade does. That would really add some flare to the show, and you wouldnt have to find a new word to use 😉
Sometimes I’m reading the screen to see what questions are coming up or Jerry is giving me some kind of signal (e.g., which line we’re going to take next, how many minutes are left in the show) and I suddenly realize that I’ve missed a crucial piece of information in what the caller is saying.
LOL! That happens to everybody at work. I’ve been on conference calls and suddenly someone will ask me what I think, and I realize that I’ve been focusing on something else. I guess the big difference for you is that a lot more people are listening… 😉
Jimmy, LawfulGood,
The key to the “oh crud, I wasn’t listening well enough” problem, is to respond with a question. That’s what I always do when in a phone conference and I get caught while reading this blog (or something like that).
“Yeah, I think… John, what do you mean by strategy?” 🙂
It works better than I ever expected it would.
OK, OK, OK. Probably not the most moral thing to do (lie).
Jimmy:
Is yours more of an “Mmm hmmm.” Or is it more like “Mmm HMMMM?” Sometimes the “Mmm HMMM?” can be very effective but the “Mmm hmmm.” can be quite off-putting. Every now and then you should try to throw in an “Mmm Hmmmmmmmmmm…” or even an “MMM hmmmm” but definitely stay away from the “MMMMM HMMMM!”
You know what I mean?
Historically, “Mmmmm-Hmmmm” has not been given the respect it deserves. Pope Innocent X was widely known to use it, though modern biographers do their best to gloss over this point. St. Martin of Tours also was famous for employing it in the confessional, though his precise meaning is not clear. Some scholars believe it may have stood for “comprends” (French – “I understand”), though others argue that it could have meant “dormez” (“Sorry – I dozed off”).