Listener and reader perceptions of um and uh

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.

Publication history
Table of contents

In media commentary, um and uh are widely considered to be undesirable, unprofessional, and distracting. Writing in Forbes, for example, Rezvani (2014) refers to them as “credibility diminishers” and advises readers to “steer [their] speech habits away from ‘Um’ and ‘Uh’ to more surefooted language.” Along the same lines, Dlugan (2011), a public speaking blogger, writes that “filler words — including um and uh […] add nothing when a speaker utters them.” In other words, uh and um are meaningless “empty calories” (McKay and McKay 2012).

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price. Direct PDF access to this article can be purchased through our e-platform.

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 7: 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.” http://​www​.cran​.r​-project​.org​/package​=ordinal/
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. http://​sixminutes​.dlugan​.com​/stop​-um​-uh​-filler​-words/
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 86: 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 37: 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. https://​www​.artofmanliness​.com​/articles​/becoming​-well​-spoken​-how​-to​-minimize​-your​-uhs​-and​-ums/
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
2018R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://​www​.R​-project​.org/
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 172: 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
2016Ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag New York. https://​ggplot2​.tidyverse​.org.
2017Tidyverse: Easily Install and Load the ‘Tidyverse’. https://​CRAN​.R​-project​.org​/package​=tidyverse
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