Codifying Aspie Language

Post Reply New Topic

It is a common shared experience among Aspies that when engaging in conversation with Neurotypicals, the feeling is that the other person is "speaking a different language", because the Aspie fails to understand non-verbal cues and "read between the lines" of what was said.

Even though both parties may be speaking the same language, in the grammatical sense, it begs the question as to what rules makes up the Aspie dialect, to the extent that there are differences in how spoken information is transmitted and received when both parties in a conversation do not commit to following the same rules of engagement.

What are the "rules" of the Aspie dialect? Perhaps a list can be started here:

1) All verbal information communicated by the speaker is provable by rational means (example: I am speaking the truth and can prove it if requested to do so)

2) All verbal information communicated by the speaker is atomic by nature, and must be assimilated in its entirety by the listener (example: listener cannot judge the validity of what is said by evaluating only part of the message)

3) The choice of words by the speaker must be guided solely by the intention of providing the listener with the clearest and most rational answer possible to the request or question that prompted the speaker to respond. The listener must trust that this is the only intention held by the speaker in guiding their choice of words.

4) As a corollary to the above, both speaker and listener agree to the primary intention of conversation as the mutual pursuit of truth, and/or finding an optimal solution to a clearly stated problem (example: neither party uses words to reinforce their position by insinuating that the other party is incompetent - refer to "political candidate debates" for a specific example of this anti-pattern)

Any other ideas?

The speaker, neurotypical, should additionally ACTUALLY f*****g TALK. A lot of times they go silent and expect you to READ THEIR f*****g BALLS!! !! !! I'm extremely frustrated by this behavior. I Just wish they would OPEN THEIR DAMN MOUTHS AND SAY WHAT THEY WANT instead of going all mousey and quiet and whimpering whenever I ask them questions they're "uncomfortable" with, whatever that means. Sorry for such an insensitive post but it's something that bothers me and I have a feeling it bothers everyone, not just us.

Yes, I can certainly relate to the feeling of having to walk on eggshells all day for fear of offending NT sensibilities. Working in an office setting is especially exhausting.

I guess the rule goes both ways when speaking Aspie. Just as the listener must trust that there are no ulterior motives for the words that are being spoken, the speaker must accept any rational explanation on how their words were misunderstood by th listener. Mutual acceptance of this convention should minimize or eliminate the need for non-verbal information.

And, yes, carrying on an intelligent conversation while eating is exceedingly difficult, and at times quite uncomfortable.

What I noticed about autistic to autistic conversation it is mostly about the exchange of information. Aspies are vulnarable to conformation bias, and irrationality because we are not robots or vulcans but human.