Cover not available

Article published In: Pragmatics: Online-First Articles

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Listener and reader perceptions of um and uh

ORCiD logo with link | University of Toronto
Published online: 1 August 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.23060.gad
Abstract
Corpus-based research on the “filled pauses” um and uh has shown that um is gaining frequency relative to uh, with um used more frequently by women and younger people. There has been some speculation that the rise of um is linked to a new discourse function or meaning, but this has not yet been fully substantiated. This paper approaches the problem from a perceptual angle, reporting the results of two experiments investigating participants’ judgments of the indexicalities of the “filled pauses” um and uh in two media: instant messaging and speech. Participants’ qualitative and quantitative responses suggest that readers and listeners associate the use of um with hesitancy, femininity, politeness, and thoughtfulness, but that uh is primarily associated just with hesitancy. I argue that these indexicalities may be linked to the ongoing change, with um indexing a potentially more desirable type of hesitation than uh.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Methods
    • 2.1Participants
      • 2.1.1Experiment 1
      • 2.1.2Experiment 2
    • 2.2Materials
      • Experiment 1
      • Experiment 2
    • 2.3Procedure
      • Experiment 1
      • Experiment 2
    • 2.4Analysis
      • 2.4.1Statistical methods
      • 2.4.2Theoretical framework
  • 3.Ordinal regression
    • 3.1Method
    • 3.2Analysis
      • 3.2.1Hesitant
      • 3.2.2Intelligent
      • 3.2.3Feminine
      • 3.2.4Masculine
      • 3.2.5Polite
    • 3.3Summary and discussion
      • 3.3.1Hypotheses
      • 3.3.2Hesitance
      • 3.3.3Intelligence
      • 3.3.4Gender
      • 3.3.5Politeness
  • 4.Qualitative responses
    • 4.1Experiment 1 (IM)
      • 4.1.1General remarks
      • 4.1.2Um and uh
    • 4.2Experiment 2 (speech)
      • 4.2.1By-stimulus responses
      • 4.2.2What does it mean when someone uses uh or um?
      • 4.2.3Do um and uh have different meanings?
        • Um as thoughtful or deliberate
        • Gender
        • Politeness and formality
        • Intelligence
    • 4.3Summary and discussion
      • 4.3.1The thoughtfulness of um
      • 4.3.2Gender and politeness
  • 5.Discussion and conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (36)
References
Addington, David W. 1968. “The Relationship of Selected Vocal Characteristics to Personality Perception.” Speech Monographs 35 (4): 492–503. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biemans, Monique. 2000. “Gender Variation in Voice Quality.” PhD thesis. Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen.
Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall. 2005. “Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural Linguistic Approach.” Discourse Studies 71: 585–614. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Campbell-Kibler, Kathryn. 2010. “The Sociolinguistic Variant as a Carrier of Social Meaning.” Language Variation and Change 22 (3): 423–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Christensen, R. H. B. 2019. “ordinal — Regression Models for Ordinal Data.” [URL]
Clark, Herbert H., and Jean E. Fox Tree. 2002. “Using Uh and Um in Spontaneous Speaking.” Cognition 84 (1): 73–111. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Leeuw, Joshua R. 2015. “jsPsych: A JavaScript Library for Creating Behavioral Experiments in a Web Browser.” Behavior Research Methods 47 (1): 1–12. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dlugan, Andrew. 2011. “How to Stop Saying Um, Uh, and Other Filler Words.” Six Minutes. [URL]
Eckert, Penelope. 2008. “Variation and the Indexical Field.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 12 (4): 453–76. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Farris, Catherine S. 1995. “A Semeiotic Analysis of Sajiao as a Gender Marked Communication Style in Chinese.” In Unbound Taiwan: Closeups from a Distance, edited by Marshall Johnson, and Fred Y. L. Chiu, 1–29. Chicago: Center for East Asian Studies.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fruehwald, Josef. 2016. “Filled Pause Choice as a Sociolinguistic Variable.” University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 22 (2): 41–49.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gadanidis, Tim. 2018. “Um, About That, Uh, Variable.” MA research paper. University of Toronto.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gadanidis, Tim, and Derek Denis. 2021. “Uh, What Should We Count?” In Discourse-Pragmatic Variation and Change: Theory, Innovations, Contact, edited by Elizabeth Peterson, Turo Hiltunen, and Joseph Kern. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. 2015. “Pragmatics of Fiction: Literary Uses of Uh and Um.” Journal of Pragmatics 861: 63–67. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koo, Hyun Jung, and Seongha Rhee. 2013. “On an Emerging Paradigm of Sentence-Final Particles of Discontent: A Grammaticalization Perspective.” Language Sciences 371: 70–89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin. 1973. “Language and Woman’s Place.” Language in Society 2 (1): 45–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levelt, Willem J. M. 1983. “Monitoring and Self-Repair in Speech.” Cognition 14 (1): 41–104. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maclay, Howard, and Charles E. Osgood. 1959. “Hesitation Phenomena in Spontaneous English Speech.” Word 15 (1): 19–44. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maddeaux, Ruth, and Aaron Dinkin. 2017. “Is Like Like Like?: Evaluating the Same Variant Across Multiple Variables.” Linguistics Vanguard 3 (1). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McKay, Brett, and Kate McKay. 2012. “Becoming Well-Spoken: How to Minimize Your Uh’s and Um’s.” Art of Manliness. [URL]
Miller, Laura. 2004. “You Are Doing Burikko!: Censoring/Scrutinizing Artificers of Cute Femininity in Japanese.” In Japanese Language, Gender, and Ideology, edited by Shigeko Okamato, and Janet S. Shibamoto Smith, 148–65. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ochs, Elinor. 1992. “Indexing Gender.” In Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, edited by Alessandro Duranti, and Charles Goodwin, 335–358. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2018. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL]
Rezvani, Selena. 2014. “Four Ways to Stop Saying ‘Um’ And Other Filler Words.” Forbes. [URL]
Rauniomaa, Mirka. 2003. “Stance Accretion.” Paper presented at the Language, Interaction, and Social Organization Research Focus Group, University of California, Santa Barbara, February 2003.
Silverstein, Michael. 2003. “Indexical Order and the Dialectics of Sociolinguistic Life.” Language & Communication 23 (3–4): 193–229. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Staley, Larssyn, and Andreas H. Jucker. 2021. “‘The Uh Deconstructed Pumpkin Pie’: The Use of Uh and Um in Los Angeles Restaurant Server Talk.” Journal of Pragmatics 1721: 21–34. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tottie, Gunnel. 2011. “Uh and Um as Sociolinguistic Markers in British English.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 16 (2): 173–97. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. “Planning What to Say: Uh and Um Among the Pragmatic Markers.” In Outside the Clause: Form and Function of Extra-Clausal Constituents, edited by Gunther Kaltenböck, Evelien Keizer, and Arne Lohmann, 97–122. John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. “From Pause to Word: Uh, Um and Er in Written American English.” English Language & Linguistics 23 (1): 105–130. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tübben, Ilenia Tonetti, and Daniela Landert. 2022. “Uh and Um as Pragmatic Markers in Dialogues: A Contrastive Perspective on the Functions of Planners in Fiction and Conversation.” Contrastive Pragmatics 4 (2): 350–81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wasserstein, Ronald L., Allen L. Schirm, and Nicole A. Lazar. 2019. “Moving to a World Beyond ‘p < 0.05’.” The American Statistician 73 (sup1): 1–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wickham, Hadley. 2016. Ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag New York. [URL].
. 2017. Tidyverse: Easily Install and Load the ‘Tidyverse’. [URL]
Wieling, Martijn, Jack Grieve, Gosse Bouma, Josef Fruehwald, John Coleman, and Mark Liberman. 2016. “Variation and Change in the Use of Hesitation Markers in Germanic Languages.” Language Dynamics and Change 6 (2): 199–234. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wiltschko, Martina, Derek Denis, and Alexandra D’Arcy. 2018. “Deconstructing Variation in Pragmatic Function: A Transdisciplinary Case Study.” Language in Society 47 (4): 569–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue