Seen, Heard, Valued: The Magic of Validation & Pronouns Are Weird! Here’s Why

Summary

Podcast Summary: "Seen, Heard, Valued: The Magic of Validation & Pronouns Are Weird! Here’s Why"

Something You Should Know
Host: Mike Carruthers | OmniCast Media
Release Date: April 7, 2025

---

Introduction

In this enlightening episode of Something You Should Know, host Mike Carruthers delves into two intricate yet profoundly impactful subjects: the profound role of validation in our personal relationships and the quirky complexities of English pronouns. By inviting experts Caroline Fleck and John McWhorter, Mike unpacks these topics with depth and clarity, offering listeners valuable insights to enhance their interpersonal connections and linguistic understanding.

---

The New Science of Validation

Guest: Caroline Fleck, Licensed Psychologist, Adjunct Clinical Instructor at Stanford University, Author of How the Skill Set That Revolutionized Psychology Will Transform Your Relationships, Increase Your Influence and Change Your Life.

Understanding Validation

Caroline Fleck opens the discussion by defining validation as the act of acknowledging and accepting another person's experiences without necessarily agreeing with them. She emphasizes its critical role in fostering deep, trusting relationships.

"[00:42] Caroline Fleck: Validation is the single most important quality of any relationship. It is as important as love. It is as central as empathy."

Validation vs. Agreement

Mike probes whether one can validate someone they dislike or disagree with. Caroline asserts that validation is especially crucial in such scenarios, as it demonstrates engagement and nonjudgment, laying the groundwork for meaningful dialogue.

"[07:18] Caroline Fleck: Validation forces us to do the opposite [of our negativity bias]. It forces us to find and speak to the validity."

Real-World Applications

Caroline shares a poignant personal story about her relationship with her daughter following her breast cancer diagnosis. Initially, her attempt to assert continuity amid her physical changes inadvertently invalidated her daughter's feelings. This experience underscored the power of validation in healing and rebuilding connections.

"[12:24] Caroline Fleck: ... what I needed to do was circle back around with her the next night... I know this has been really, really painful for you..."

Practical Examples of Validation

To illustrate validation in everyday life, Caroline provides examples such as affirming someone's decision to seek a second opinion, thereby validating their feelings without endorsing their specific viewpoint.

"[09:15] Caroline Fleck: ... saying, 'Yeah, anyone in your shoes would doubt that...' That's validating."

The Psychological Impact

Validation acts as a natural sedative, reducing physiological arousal and allowing individuals to process emotions more effectively. This calming effect enhances cognitive functions like memory and comprehension, facilitating better communication.

"[20:44] Caroline Fleck: Validation is almost like a natural sedative. It functions to decrease physiological arousal."

Overcoming Barriers to Validation

Caroline acknowledges the innate negativity bias that often impedes validation. She encourages intentional practice, such as simply attending to someone's feelings or mirroring their statements, to cultivate a more validating presence in interactions.

"[24:43] Caroline Fleck: ... you can just attend, you can just copy, which is exactly what it sounds like."

---

The Quirky World of English Pronouns

Guest: John McWhorter, Professor of Linguistics, American Studies, and Music History at Columbia University, Host of Lexicon Valley, Author of Pronoun: The Story of Us in Seven Little Words.

The Complexity of Pronouns

John McWhorter explores the intricate nature of English pronouns, highlighting their evolution and the challenges they present compared to pronouns in other languages.

"[32:09] Mike Carruthers: So I get that you're a word guy, a language guy. But why pronouns?"

Historical Perspective

John provides a historical overview, revealing that Old English had a more complex pronoun system, distinguishing between singular and plural forms, which has since been simplified in Modern English.

"[32:57] John McWhorter: [...] Old English had words like 'thou' for singular and 'yeet' for dual forms."

Subject vs. Object Pronouns

A major point of discussion is the misconception stemming from Latin-based grammar rules that have incorrectly influenced English pronoun usage. John clarifies that phrases like "Billy and me went to the store" were historically acceptable in English, debunking the rigid subject-object separation taught in modern grammar.

"[35:22] John McWhorter: [...] It's always been a myth that English has subject and object pronouns in that way that Latin does."

The Singular "They"

John delves into the nuances of the singular "they," tracing its usage back to authors like Chaucer and highlighting its practicality in modern language despite lingering confusion.

"[43:04] Caroline Fleck: [...] when you knock on the door, you can say it is I, but you don't. You say it's me."

Pronoun Consistency Across Languages

Contrasting English with languages like French and Spanish, John points out how other languages maintain distinct pronouns for singular and plural forms, eliminating the ambiguity that English pronouns often create.

"[34:02] John McWhorter: [...] languages like French have 'tu' for singular and 'vous' for plural or polite forms."

Evolution and Resistance

While languages continuously evolve, pronouns are notably resistant to change due to their foundational role in communication. John discusses how attempts to alter pronoun usage in English often clash with ingrained linguistic habits.

"[46:25] Mike Carruthers: [...] pronouns seem to be, with few exceptions, pretty rock solid."

Gender-Neutral Pronouns

The conversation touches on the emergence of gender-neutral pronouns beyond the singular "they," though John notes their limited adoption and the complexities involved in integrating new pronouns into everyday language.

"[44:35] Mike Carruthers: Gender neutral one, the pronoun we."

---

Conclusion

This episode of Something You Should Know masterfully intertwines the psychological significance of validation with the linguistic peculiarities of English pronouns. Caroline Fleck and John McWhorter provide listeners with actionable insights and a deeper appreciation for both interpersonal dynamics and language structure. Whether seeking to enhance personal relationships through validation or simply curious about the oddities of pronouns, this episode offers valuable knowledge to enrich everyday life.

---

Notable Quotes

• Caroline Fleck [00:42]: "Validation is the single most important quality of any relationship. It is as important as love. It is as central as empathy."

• Caroline Fleck [07:18]: "Validation forces us to do the opposite. It forces us to find and speak to the validity."

• Caroline Fleck [12:24]: "... what I needed to do was circle back around with her the next night... I know this has been really, really painful for you..."

• Caroline Fleck [09:15]: "... saying, 'Yeah, anyone in your shoes would doubt that...' That's validating."

• Caroline Fleck [20:44]: "Validation is almost like a natural sedative. It functions to decrease physiological arousal."

• John McWhorter [32:57]: "Old English had words like 'thou' for singular and 'yeet' for dual forms."

• John McWhorter [35:22]: "It's always been a myth that English has subject and object pronouns in that way that Latin does."

• John McWhorter [34:02]: "... languages like French have 'tu' for singular and 'vous' for plural or polite forms."

• Caroline Fleck [24:43]: "... you can just attend, you can just copy, which is exactly what it sounds like."

---

Explore more episodes of Something You Should Know for fascinating insights and practical advice from experts across various fields.

Transcript

[Speaker A]

Wow, this house is cute. But can I really get in the.

[Caroline Fleck]

Game in this economy?

[Speaker A]

I do have savings and I am responsible. Ish.

[Caroline Fleck]

Ugh, I should bury it.

[Speaker A]

I'm being wild. But what if I'm not being wild though? Could I actually Score a kick off.

[John McWhorter]

Your home buying journey with Zillow's new buyability tool? It makes it easy to find out what you can afford so you can get off the bench and onto the playing field with confidence. Check your buyability only on Zillow.

[Mike Carruthers]

Today on something you should know why are there different blood types and do you know yours? Then the New Science of Validation Validating.

[Caroline Fleck]

Another person's experience Validation is the single most important quality of any relationship. It is as important as love. It is as central as empathy. And yet we rarely talk about it in those terms.

[Mike Carruthers]

Also, what hiring managers say should and should not be on your resume and the strange world of English pronouns.

[John McWhorter]

What is it about English that you know all little kids speaking English naturally say him and me went to the park, and then you tell them, no, it's he and I went to the park because you wouldn't say him went to the park. But then the question becomes, why is it that you always have to be taught that?

[Mike Carruthers]

All this today on Something you should know. Whenever I've had to hire someone, I didn't have the luxury of taking my time and thinking about it. It was always we need someone and we need them now. And if you ever find yourself in that situation, Indeed is all you need. With Indeed Sponsored Jobs, your job postings really stand out. It's simple. With Sponsored Jobs, your posts jump right to the top of the page for your relevant candidates so you can reach the people you want faster. According to Indeed data, Sponsored jobs posted directly on indeed have 45% more applications than non sponsored jobs. And that's the thing, right? You need good quality candidates fast so you can review them and quickly move on to the hiring phase. Indeed makes this whole thing easier than trying to do it on your own. And with Indeed, you only pay for results. How fast is Indeed? Well, in the minute I've been Talking to you, 23 hires were made on Indeed, according to Indeed Data worldwide. Look, there's no need to wait any longer. Speed up your hiring right now with Indeed, and listeners of this show will get a $75 sponsor job credit to get your jobs more visibility@ Indeed.com something just go to Indeed.com something right now and support our show by saying you heard about Indeed on this podcast. Indeed.com something terms and conditions apply. Hiring indeed is all you need.

[John McWhorter]

Something you should know, fascinating intel, the world's top experts, and practical advice you.

[Mike Carruthers]

Can use in your life today. Something you Should Know with Mike Carruthers. Do you know your blood type? You probably should, and I'll tell you why. Hi, and welcome to another episode of Something youg Should know. There are four blood types. A, B, AB, and O. Blood types were first discovered in 1900, and the person who discovered them won a Nobel Prize for it in 1930. Yet here we are over 100 years later, and science still has no idea why we have different blood types. However, knowing about blood types is what allows for life saving blood transfusions. Earlier, doctors had tried blood transfusions, but unless they just happened to match up a donor and a receiver by chance who had the same blood type, or if the donor had universal type O, the patient would die. Because your immune system knows your blood type and recognizes another blood type as an invader it cannot defeat. In 1952, some people were discovered to have no blood type at all. It's called the Bombay phenotype because Bombay, which is now Mumbai, is where the first people with this were discovered. It is very rare. 1 in 10,000 people in India have this, and 1 in 1 million people outside of India have it. And people with no blood type must get transfusions from other people with no blood type. Even the universal type. Oh. Can kill them. And that is something you should know. There's a term in psychology I know you've heard before, validation. To validate someone is to acknowledge their experience. It's not agreeing or disagreeing. It's simply acknowledging the validity of what they believe. And it turns out to be a very powerful way to connect with someone and deepen the conversation and deepen the relationship. So why does validation work so well? And how do you do it exactly? Well, here to discuss this is Caroline Fleck. She is a licensed psychologist, adjunct clinical instructor at Stanford University, and author of the book how the skill set that revolutionized Psychology will transform your relationships in increase your influence and change your life. Hi, Caroline. Welcome to something you should know.

[Caroline Fleck]

Hello. Thank you for having me.

[Mike Carruthers]

So I just explained what validation is from my understanding, but let me have you start by putting a finer point on that.

[Caroline Fleck]

Yeah, so validation just communicates that you accept and see the validity in another person's experience. It's a way of showing that you're there, you get it, and you care.

[Mike Carruthers]

And can you validate someone that you don't like? You don't agree with, you have nothing in common with. Can you still validate them?

[Caroline Fleck]

Such a good question. Yes. In fact, I would argue that these are some of the most important times to validate someone. Validation consists of some degree of being mindful of understanding and empathizing with the other person. But you don't have to hit all of those notes if you can just be mindful. If all you can do is attend, that in and of itself can signal some degree of validation. It shows that you are engaged, that you are being nonjudgmental, that you are accepting what you are hearing. That is different, very different from saying that you agree with what you are hearing or what the other person's position is.

[Mike Carruthers]

Ah, yeah, I would think that's a huge difference. Cause I've had people tell me things that I certainly don't agree with, but I. I honor their right to believe and say what they believe and say.

[Caroline Fleck]

Yeah, I think, you know, it even goes beyond that, actually. If we really want to be effective in challenging somebody else's perspective, we cannot get there if we open with disagreement. And I learned this, you know, kind of. I had a crash course in this through my work as a therapist, where you're working with folks who have extremely distorted thoughts, oftentimes to the point of, like, delusion. And I have to help that person change how they're thinking. But in order to do so, I need a foot in the door. And so I have to be able to communicate some degree of acceptance. And that is what validation allows me to do.

[Mike Carruthers]

And you do that. Why? What is the magic of validation? What does it do?

[Caroline Fleck]

Validation is the single most important quality of any relationship. It is as important as love, it is as central as empathy. And yet we rarely talk about it in those terms. But if one does not feel seen or accepted by another, it is very hard to have an intimate, close, trusting relationship with that person. So I often think of validation as, like, the skeleton key. Not just the key to change or the key to connection, but the skeleton key in that it fosters connection in all sorts of different relationships in all sorts of different contexts. So it really is that critical.

[Mike Carruthers]

And so can you give me some, like, very typical, everyday examples of validations? Because we've been talking about it as something that people supposedly know what that is, but what does it look like?

[Caroline Fleck]

Yeah, so validation can take all sorts of different shapes. Sometimes it's something you say, sometimes it's something you do. But some examples would be saying something to the effect of, well, anybody in your shoes would Want a second opinion. You know, after perhaps a friend tells you that they don't like their doctor and aren't sure about the advice they're getting. If you were to say, yeah, anyone in your shoes would. Would doubt that I would get a second opinion too. That's validating. It shows that there is validity in the person's perspective that they are not crazy for thinking or feeling whatever they're thinking or feeling.

[Mike Carruthers]

So if validation is so powerful, why don't we just do it naturally? Why don't we just kind of revert to that?

[Caroline Fleck]

We confuse it with agreement. We worry that in validating some part of a person's experience, we will communicate that we agree with them. And that is not the case. So I'll take an extreme example of, say, working with a paranoid schizophrenic, as I have in the past, who thinks that I, as the therapist, am colluding with the government to, you know, read their mail and sabotage them. I do not believe. I do not agree with that thought process. However, if I was thinking those things, I sure as heck would not trust this therapist. I would withdraw. I would not feel comfortable speaking to them. So if, as the therapist, I say, listen, it makes total sense that you are distrustful of me. I understand that you think X, Y, or Z, I can see if I were in your shoes, I wouldn't want to open up either. So with that, what I'm doing is really just validating that person's emotions. Given what they are thinking, their emotions make sen sense. I can focus on that part of their experience, validate that, just the emotions. In so doing, I am not in any way validating their thoughts, I. E. Communicating that I think it's logical or that I agree with the rationale. Nor am I necessarily validating their behavior, which is another thing we get worried about doing. So it allows me to narrow in on what is valid, what is the kernel of truth in another person's perspective. Because instead, what we tend to do is focus on what we don't like or what we disagree with, that is our innate negativity bias. Validation forces us to do the opposite. It forces us to find and speak to the validity.

[Mike Carruthers]

What are some ways? Because most of us don't deal with schizophrenics or governments or anything, but just like in everyday life with my kids or my. My wife or my, like, how would validation. Some examples like that would be really helpful.

[Caroline Fleck]

I'll give a really. A really personal example, if that's okay. I was diagnosed with breast Cancer. And actually, right after completing the book, and I had to do the whole gamut of treatment, you know, mastectomy, radiation, chemotherapy. And in that process, I lost my hair. And my daughter has felt that I am not the same person since I lost my hair. As though almost like there was, like a body swap situation. Like, I am a fundamentally different person. I am not the mom that she knows. This has been obviously incredible, incredibly painful for me. I don't agree. I see some ways in which I've changed, but I love her dearly. I am still her mother. And I have worked so hard this past year, since I've been in recovery to rebuild that relationship with her. And we've gotten into such a better place. And just the other night, we were cuddling, and we were just having this really intimate moment. She was saying how she'd missed me throughout the day. And then she said, mom, could you just be the old you for just a minute? Could you just try and be the old you? And it was like a dagger to my heart. Right? It's just. Oh, God. This disease has just. It just feels like it's taken so much. And in that moment, what I want to do is say, I am the same person, honey. I'm here. I'm your mom. I love you. But what probably needs to happen there, what I know needs to happen there, is for her to feel validated. And in that moment, I'll be honest with you, it hurt so bad that I found myself saying, no, baby, I am your mom. I am your mom. I don't know how to change, to convey that. And in that moment, I immediately realized I'd invalidated her. She shut down, okay? She did not feel seen or heard. And so what I needed to do was circle back around with her the next night, as I did, and say last night, I shouldn't have jumped in there and said, insisted that I'm your mom. I know this has been really, really painful for you, and nobody else sees what you're seeing. That must feel really lonely. And I get it. It's almost like mourning someone, right? Except you're the only one who sees that. That must be really scary. And in that conversation, there was so much tenderness, so much opening up, and we were able to reconnect. And so that, I think, is the power of validation. That's what it looks like when we're confronted with things that we really don't like and we see so much wrong with. We're forced to attend instead to the person behind those beliefs or those statements. Or whatever the case may be.

[Mike Carruthers]

Well, that is such a great example and I want to ask you a question about it. We're talking about the power of validation and my guest is Caroline Fleck, author of the book Validation how the skill set that revolutionized psychology will transform your relationships, increase your influence and change your life.

[Speaker A]

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever find yourself playing the budgeting game, shifting a little money here, a little there and hoping it all works out well? With the name your price tool from Progressive, you can be a better budgeter and potentially lower your insurance bill too. You tell Progressive what you want to pay for car insurance and they'll help you find options within your budget. Try it [e-mail] Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates Price and coverage match limited by state law. Not available in all states.

[Mike Carruthers]

We talk quite a bit about health on this podcast and I can tell you I try to take care of myself. I mean, I work at it. And for a while now I've been taking this supplement called Mitopure and I can tell you I feel stronger when I exercise. I recover faster. What Mitopure is, is a precise dose of something called Urolithin A. I've read a lot about it. It's a natural compound that's produced by gut bacteria and Mitopure is this precise dose that encourages cellular renewal. Mitopure is the only Urolithin A supplement on the market clinically proven to target the effects of age related cellular decline. And that's the thing, see, it works on the cellular level and with regular use you'll see and feel the difference in the form of improved energy levels, more endurance, and when you exercise, you'll recover faster. Now, as you get older, you probably know that you lose muscle strength. So this is important. Mitopure is shown to deliver double digit increases in muscle strength and endurance without a change in exercise. So awaken the strength, power and resilience already in you with the first and only supplement clinically proven to rejuvenate health at the cellular level. I encourage you to read more about it on their website. Timeline is offering 10% off your order of Mitopure. Go to timeline.com something that's T I M E L I N E.com something. So Caroline, that example you just gave a moment ago of you and your daughter, if I were in your shoes, it would never even really occur to me. To validate what she was feeling, I would rush to correct her why what she's feeling is wrong.

[Caroline Fleck]

Yeah. So one of the biggest problems we run into, Be it with our kids or our partners, is do I respond with problem solving or validation? Okay, nine times out of 10, when people come to us with an issue, they're looking for some degree of validation. They want to know that we get it. We see it. Instead, nine times out of ten, what we do is we problem solve. Kiddo comes home having failed their spelling quiz, and they say, I don't know what happened. They're so upset, they're crying. And our inclination is to problem solve. Hey, tomorrow on the drive into school, we can review the words or not tomorrow, but let's say the next time you have a spelling test, we'll review the words on the drive in so that they'll be fresh in your mind. Or maybe we can get a tutor. Maybe that would help. So when we see our kiddos in pain, we want to change that situation. We want to intervene in some way to prevent them from feeling that pain in the future. That's a disaster. Because in that moment, the kid is not looking for problem solving. They just want to be validated. And so if instead I say, oh, you've got to be kidding me. You must be so disappointed. You studied so hard. That's so unfair. You'll start to have a very different conversation, One that ironically or strangely enough, may lead you down the path to problem solving at some point. Because once the individual trusts that you get it, they're exponentially more likely to listen to your ideas on how to fix whatever's going on. So in any given moment, be it with our kids, our spouse, whomever I try to slow down and ask, am I. Should I respond with problem solving here or validation? And that little pause is everything. It really is.

[Mike Carruthers]

What happens when. What is it that happens in. When you validate me, when I. For whatever reason, what goes on in my head when I hear that?

[Caroline Fleck]

Yeah, it's a great question. And it kind of depends on the situation. So we know that that validation is almost like a natural sedative. It functions to decrease physiological arousal. And so that increased heart rate and even things like pupils dilating that we may or may not be aware of, all of that calms down, and we start to. In calming down. Once we're validated through that process of regulation, our brains become able to process more effectively. We're able to listen better. Our memories are sharper. All of that. All of that which gets shut down when we're flooded comes back online once we've been validated.

[Mike Carruthers]

Yeah, it's like a Magic. It's like a magic elixir that just. It changes everything. And it's so. From what you're saying, I mean, it's not hard to do if you just remember to do it.

[Caroline Fleck]

Yeah, that's right. And I mean, magic elixir, kind of these sound like such extreme metaphors or examples, but really, that is what this does. I mean, that is why I am so passionate about it. Like, validation revolutionized clinical psychology when it was introduced to the field some 30 years ago. And it did so because it is so powerful. So I think it is a matter of just helping more people understand the concept when it's needed, and how to communicate it.

[Mike Carruthers]

I mean, I've heard of validation in this context for a long time, but is there, like, emerging science here, or is this just kind of a tried and true method that people just don't use?

[Caroline Fleck]

That's such a. It's such an interesting question to me, because it was kind of new science back in the, say, 1990s. So up until that point. And a lot of this stuff originated in clinical psychology, where you're trying to help people make changes when it's really difficult for them to do so for various reasons. Right. So if you think it's hard to get someone to commit to a workout routine naturally, imagine doing so when they're severely depressed. Those are the stakes that we're often dealing with when we're working with the clinical population. What works in those cases tends to work amazingly in less severe cases. It was in the 90s that we started to develop therapies that coupled this emphasis on change, good habits, reinforcement, all these terms that most folks are familiar with, with a corresponding emphasis on. On validation. And it was once we combined that kind of acceptance with change that things really blew up in the field of clinical psychology. So I would say that in the last 30 years, there's been a lot of research and science, but it hasn't gone much beyond that. Although this sounds new to a lot of people outside of the field, I.

[Mike Carruthers]

Would imagine that one of the reasons people don't want to validate, as I think about people that I know to validate, is it's not to agree with them, but it elevates their position. It gives them some validation that what they think is correct. And I've been in situations with people where I don't feel like I want to do that, that I don't want to give them an inch of anything, because I have my position and I think I'm right. And yet, as I Listen to you. I think it probably would be helpful to validate for all the reasons you've said, but it doesn't feel right.

[Caroline Fleck]

It is, again, it is that negativity bias, right? We're wired to focus on what we don't like or don't agree with, but that is on steroids when we perceive somebody to be a threat to us. And so from that perspective, connecting, relating at all feels dangerous. And evolutionarily, we can see why that would be the case. Yet in everyday life, that very kind of basic, animalistic, I'm going to use those terms again, fight or flight way of responding or reacting to people isn't always adaptive or in the service of our goals, our values, or our relationships. But what I would say for you in the context of that situation, remember, you don't have to hit all of the notes of you're mindful, you're understanding, you're empathizing. At a bare minimum, you can just attend, you can just copy, which is exactly what it sounds like. You literally just repeat, you know, almost verbatim what another person has said to you. And the fascinating thing about copying is that it's. It's an intervention we use as couples therapists in the context of conflict management. So we will have, as couples are arguing, I might tell one partner to write down exactly what the other person is saying. Okay? And I want you to just repeat it back to them. Don't add your interpretation, don't give your rebuttal, just restate what they have said. And then I will have them switch places so the speaker becomes the listener and vice versa. Let me tell you, that is one of the most powerful interventions. And I was shocked by that. I did not want to. I thought this sounded very contrived when I was trained in this method. But there is something about just being heard. And the fascinating thing about using those basic skills is that they actually foster understanding and empathy. Copying, in particular, we know, functions to help us feel through mirror neurons some of what the other person is feeling. And in so doing, we start to empathize and perhaps understand.

[Mike Carruthers]

Well, I'm really glad we had this conversation because, you know, I have, and I'm sure everyone has heard about validation at times and how important it is, but I never really knew exactly how important it is or also how it worked and why it worked. And I appreciate you coming on and explaining this all. I've been speaking with Caroline Fleck. She is a licensed psychologist and adjunct clinical instructor at Stanford University and author of the book how the Skill set that revolutionized psychology will transform your relationships, increase your influence and change your life. There's a link to her book at Amazon in the show notes. Caroline, thank you for being here and explaining it.

[Caroline Fleck]

Thank you so much. Have a great one.

[Mike Carruthers]

I am a food lover. I love to cook. I've collected probably 100 cookbooks over the years. Good food is important to me, but some days I can't cook or I just don't want to cook. But I still want to eat well. Which is why I love and want to tell you about Factor Meals. Factor Meals are freshly prepared meals delivered to your door. And to be clear, these are not frozen meals. This is not a kit of ingredients that you have to make. These meals are complete restaurant quality meals. You simply heat them up for two minutes. Eating well has never been this easy. They have 45 weekly menu options. You can pick gourmet meals that fit your goals. Choose from Calorie Smart Protein plus, Keto Vegetarian and more meals like Ginger Teriyaki, Salmon, Cheesy Chicken and Broccoli Casserole, Garlic Rosemary Pork Chops. What we do at our house is we serve the food on nice plates, maybe with a glass of wine and and I swear you would think you're eating at a fine restaurant. The food is really that good. Factor also offers satisfying breakfasts, lunches and guilt free snacks and desserts. So look, here's an offer that makes this easy to give it a try. Get [e-mail] something 50 off and use code something 50 off to get 50% off plus free shipping on your first box. That's code something 50 off at 50factormeals.com something 50 OFF for 50% off plus free shipping and I'll put that promo code in the show notes. Every business owner knows there's your business and then there's the business behind the business. The guts of it that make everything run smoothly. And for so many businesses, the business behind the business is Shopify. Shopify is home of the number one checkout on the planet and the not so secret secret with shop pay that boosts conversions up to 50% meaning far fewer carts going abandoned and way more sales going to you. I know plenty of people with small businesses and even home based businesses that use Shopify. But also big brands use Shopify like Mattel Magic Spoon, Death Wish Coffee. In order to grow your business, your commerce platform better be ready to sell wherever your customers are scrolling or strolling on the web, in your store, in their feed and everywhere in between. Businesses that sell more sell on Shopify it's no accident that Shopify is the number one checkout system. Upgrade your business and get the same checkout Thrive Cosmetics and Heinz and so many other businesses use. Sign up for your $1 per month trial period at shopify.comsysk all lowercase go to shopify.comsysk to upgrade your selling today. Shopify.comsysk Imagine how many words you say or write every day, and a lot of those words are pronouns. You know, he, she, we, they, pronouns. And despite what you might think, pronouns are a fascinating category of words. All languages have some sort of pronouns, but English pronouns behave differently and have evolved differently than in other languages. Here to explain all this is John McWhorter. He teaches linguistics, American studies, and music history at Columbia University, and he hosts a podcast called Lexicon Valley. John is the author of 23 books, including his latest pronoun, the Story of Us in Seven Little Words. And since you use these pronouns all the time, I think you will be fascinated by the stories he's about to tell you. Hi John, welcome to Something youg Should Know.

[John McWhorter]

Hi. Thank you for having me.

[Mike Carruthers]

So I get that you're a word guy, a language guy. You like that. But why pronouns? Why single them out? Why single them out and talk about them as a group?

[John McWhorter]

I was interested in pronouns because English actually has, depending on how you count it, a compact collection of seven words that we use to replace nouns when we're speaking spontaneously and quickly, we don't say the noun over and over again, and words have interesting histories, and pronouns are included in that. And pronouns change a lot from one stage of the language to another. And I think a lot of people would be surprised at how English's pronouns worked in Old English, as opposed to the way they do now.

[Mike Carruthers]

So give me an example. What is so interesting about pronouns?

[John McWhorter]

Well, the funny thing is that, for example, we think that having just our word you to refer to both a single person and a bunch of people is normal. Nothing feels more normal than that to an Anglophone. But the truth is that normal languages have one word for one you, and then another word for two or more us. Or they can even cut the salami thinner than that. And certainly in earlier English, thou meant just one person. You was not used for one person, it was used for two or or more people. And then both thou and you had different forms, depending on whether they were subject or object. And in Old English there was even one you used when it was only two but not more people. There was a word Yeet. And so you would have said, thou yeet and you. That's one, two, and then three or more second persons, so to speak. Now all we have is you. English in the modern sense is a very telegraphic language compared to most languages when it comes to pronouns. But even earlier Englishes.

[Mike Carruthers]

So I can say you and talk to you, or I could say you and talk to a group of people, hundreds of people, and it's still you.

[John McWhorter]

Whereas Chaucer would have found that bizarre. Exactly.

[Mike Carruthers]

Do other languages find that bizarre?

[John McWhorter]

Yeah. I mean, really, if you think about it, if you try to learn pretty much any other language, Hindi is one exception. But if you try your hand at French or Russian or Polish or Chinese or just about anything else, one of the first things you have to learn is that there is a word for you with one person, and then there's a word for you with several people, like two in Spanish. And then you have. Well, let's use French. So, for example, du in French is 1U. And then vous is plural, you. Now, there are all sorts of issues with how you toggle between the two of those, including politeness. And so, for example, in French, you can use vous, the plural one, with one person to indicate politeness and everything. But the thing is, there is a two, and that's the way languages are supposed to work. In Spanish, tu. And then depending on what Spanish you're speaking, either vosotros or you've got ustedes or something for more than one U. That's normal. It's English that's the odd man out in this sense.

[Mike Carruthers]

So talk about I and me, because I think people. Well, I hear people get it wrong or what I think is wrong or maybe it isn't wrong. So talk about those.

[John McWhorter]

Yeah, there's an issue with what we call subject and object in English, and it's based on the way Latin works, because the people who first formally described how English works were people who were in the thrall to Latin as one of the most wonderful and complex and elegant languages that had ever existed. And we can understand their perspective. Travel was harder. And Westerners, whatever you want to call that, we're not as cosmopolitan as many of them are now. But there was a kind of a Latin fetish. And so we're led to think that I is the subject and me is the object. And that therefore, if you say Billy and me went to the store, you're making a mistake because me is an object form, and you would never say me went to the store. And again, it's understandable that people think that you're taught that by people who take themselves quite seriously. But the truth is, it's always been a myth that English has subject and object pronouns in that way that Latin does. And the idea that it does is something that people created in the 1700s based on an idea that that's the way English must work. But then the question becomes, why is it that you always have to be taught that? What is it about English that, you know, all little kids speaking English naturally say, him and me went to the park. And then you tell them, no, it's he and I went to the park. Because you wouldn't say, him went to the park. Park. When this is the issue one French works exactly that way. You couldn't say, guillaume et je went to the park. You have to say guillaume et moi. And nobody in French has any problem with it. Why is it such an issue in English? And then also in a language like Spanish, which really does observe the rule that we're told, nobody messes it up, there's no error. No kid would ever say, guillermo y me went to the park. Guillermo yo. They know to do it. Why is it that in English kids have such trouble and that people without a certain amount of education supposedly have so much trouble? The truth is that English works differently than Spanish and Latin. And it very much works. There's a whole different rule. It's French's rule that we're not taught. So there's a grand confusion about that. And I openly understand that because we associate Billy and Me went to the store with being kind of slovenly, we'll always have to correct ourselves to Billy and I went to the store. Informal situations. But we should understand that that is as arbitrary as the fact that 125 years ago, men were running around in top hats. You know, there was nothing necessary about it. That's just the way that it was. But Billy and me went to the store. Him and me went to the store. Perfectly ordinary English that Shakespeare wouldn't have had any problem with at all.

[Mike Carruthers]

And yet, who says it's a problem now? I mean, just English teachers pretty much.

[John McWhorter]

Because they were taught it by other English teachers. And I think deep down, most of us feel it more natural to say, me and Billy went to the store rather than Billy and I. We condition ourselves. And just like you learn to kind of put your legs together if you feel food about to fall down on the floor. But it's a conditioned reflex. It's not how English really goes. Which is why if you watch a bunch of kids breaking a lamp and then somebody asks you, who broke that lamp? You don't say, oh, they, even though they would be the subject. They broke it. Who broke that lamp? You say them, even though you would never say them broke it. So the reason that we end up not learning this quote unquote rule is because you can't speak English without breaking it all the time. You have to say it was them. You have to say them if asked who broke the lamp? If you knock on the door, you can say it is I, but you don't. You say it's me, even though that me isn't. And so that's what kids grow up internalizing. And then they're told that they're breaking the rule to say me and Billy went to the store. Really, me and Billy went to the store is because you say, who broke the lamp? Me. So we could have a more consistent rule. But, you know, life is never perfect.

[Mike Carruthers]

The idea that we, in your example, me and Billy went to the store. And when you're corrected, it's not only that you change me to I, but you change the order that Billy always goes first. It's Billy and I, not me and Billy. Is that true in other languages? Does everybody else go first and you're at the end?

[John McWhorter]

I am aware of no language where that's the way it works. And what's really at issue with that sentence is I and Billy went to the store. Notice that it sounds like a Martian is speaking. But it shouldn't, because after all, I is a subject. But in terms of the. The order of pronouns, it being based on that issue. Issue of respect. No. Now, there are languages that do subject pronominal forms, if I may, to certain orders just because that's the way it goes. But it wouldn't be that the woman goes before the man or that you don't talk about yourself first out of some kind of courtesy. And of course, I do not control anything, like every language in the world. But a linguist such as me messes around with a whole lot of them. And I feel pretty comfortable in saying that grammar does not work according to formality when it comes to the order of pronouns. That's. That would be quite unprecedented.

[Mike Carruthers]

Is it completely up to the whoever is speaking as to when to use the pronoun versus the noun? Is it just to mix things up? I mean, is there a proper way to do it? Or it just. Sometimes you use the name and sometimes it's he?

[John McWhorter]

Well, Pretty much after you use the name or you've named the thing, then you use the pronoun, unless you need to clarify because the subject has changed and you need to go back to cases. But for the most part, pronouns are what you use to specify after you have made it clear what you're talking about, which means that we use them an awful lot. They're very deeply seated. You could almost say they're not words, they're more things, they're tools, they're screws. And it's the sort of thing that you end up writing a book about because they really do constitute a class of their own. You wouldn't write a book about adverbs. They're not a distinct enough category. But with pronouns, they're their own thing.

[Mike Carruthers]

Well, the thing that really drives me nuts about pronouns is when people. When there's two guys, right? Or two women in the sentence or in the story. So he told him that he was gonna. And I don't know who. Which he you're talking about. And then that gets confusing. Are you talking about the Billy he or the Tommy he? And they know what they're saying, but I don't know what I'm hearing.

[John McWhorter]

Yeah, English has an issue with that. And sometimes if you're talking about controlled language, such as writing, it's the writer's job or the editor's job to make that sort of thing clear. What he do you mean, or which her do you mean? I just read a very long nonfiction book by a brilliant person I'm not going to name where that was a major problem, and for some reason the editor didn't fix it. And so I was always looking back to figure out which he would he mean, which Edgar, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. But, you know, it's interesting that part of the reason we have a problem with that is that English is just so impoverished. There are languages where you would use two different words there for he, depending on the two of them, and you would be able to always know which he it was because one of them came up first, one of them came up second, and you would use a different word. English takes it light. And that means that we end up having to use context and sometimes a little bit of kind of beard pulling effort to figure out things like that.

[Mike Carruthers]

So is it your position that me and Billy went to the stores just fine? I mean, people may correct you, but it's okay to say, if I could.

[John McWhorter]

Wave a magic wand, I would make it that nobody felt at all bad about saying it and nobody Would say, Billy and I went to the store at all. Because it's modeled on a language we don't speak, which is Latin. I can't always have what I want. But yeah, I find that to be a perfectly logical and even elegant sentence in English where our rules about quote unquote, subject and object pronouns are just different from the way they happen to be in Latin.

[Mike Carruthers]

Talk about they, the singular they, the plural they. It gets confusing and I have no idea what the rules are.

[John McWhorter]

Well, it's one of those things. You look at they and you think about other languages that you may have learned and you think they is plural. And therefore to say something like tell each student that they can hand their paper in after 5 o'clock if they want to is wrong, because a student is a single thing rather than a plural thing. But that singular they was something you can find as far back as, again, Chaucer. It's always been felt to be natural to say things like a person can't help their birthday. As Thackeray said in Vanity Fair, not a person can't help his or her birth, or something like that. A person can't help their birth. Because even way back in highly sexist times, there was an underlying sense that to say a person can't help his birth leaves out women. You can pretend that it also includes women, and many people have, including some female grammarians back then, but it doesn't. And psycholinguistic experiments since then have shown. So you want there to be a.

[Mike Carruthers]

Gender neutral one, the pronoun we. Well, talk about that. Why is that? Or where is it? It seems like that's fairly non confusing.

[John McWhorter]

Yeah, we is kind of the boring one because we kind of keeps to itself and there isn't a whole lot of drama about it. But it's interesting the little corners that it pops up in. And so now it's time to take our pill. You say to one person, and the reason that you say our pillow is because you're trying to soften the blow by making it seem like it's something the two of you are involved in together. The person who's making you do it is kind of pretending that they're going to suffer as well. And so we use we in that way to indicate a kind of softening or politeness that frankly, normal languages like French and Spanish use other pronouns often for. And so that's why you call one person vu, to kind of soften the blow so that you're not kind of up in their face. English can't do that the way those languages do it. And so we have stealth ways of doing it. And one of those things is, you know, let's take our pill, or give us a look at how much money you got. Two criminals might say in a novel. I'm thinking specifically of one by Joyce. But just by chance, you could find this in America, too. You know, give us a look. And what the person means is, give me a look, because you already know what's in your hand. But again, that is less blunt than saying, let me see what you've got in your hand. Give us a look implies that you're sharing the experience, that you're not asking just for yourself. So we use we in that way. But it's an interesting little pronoun in that its history is very obscure. You can trace the other ones back pretty neatly. We is not always that clear, especially where we, as opposed to us, comes from. But it's subtle how subtle we can get.

[Mike Carruthers]

How much have pronouns changed and how likely are they to change? Like, English is always evolving, but pronouns seem to be, with few exceptions, seem to be pretty rock solid.

[John McWhorter]

Yeah, pronouns don't change easily, and so they do change, but they resist it, especially because they are so deeply seated. Old English was different in that there was not only yeet, meaning you two, but there was also a we two, as opposed to we three. It was wheat, and so there was wheat and yeet, and you had thou and the. And you had a he and a she and a they. And the they was semi sensitive to gender back then. There was kind of a female they in some dialects, but for the most part, what you had was there was iness and Venus, and then there was thouness and Eunice, and now we just have the Eunice, but still. And then there was he, she, it, and they. And so it's not utterly unrecognizable. The word for she was. The word for she was haya. We would have no idea what an Old English speaker was saying if they said, heya, walks, or something like that. But in general, it was. It was the same basic plan, whereas the rest of English has changed so much that it's a completely different language. Old English might as well be German, whereas Modern English is Modern English and is not really very much like any other language in terms of a lot of the things that have happened to it. But the pronouns are, you know, they're recognizable for the most part, and that's because pronouns are kind of rock solid.

[Mike Carruthers]

Well, what was that word for she? Hair.

[John McWhorter]

Believe it or not. So he was. He was hey. And then she was haya. And so H E for he, H e O for she. But it wasn't pronounced hey. Oh, it was pronounced heya. Isn't that weird? That was she. And the two of them sounded a little alike. And so there were some dialects where people were just saying hey for both he and she. But that was not embraced as a gender neutral pronoun. They wanted there to be a female pronoun back then, a feminine pronoun. And so they brought in a word that had originally meant that and was used with things of feminine gender in the sense of, in Spanish, la luna. And so the moon, for some reason is. Is feminine. The moon is a girl. Well, Old English worked that way too, like normal European languages do. It's Modern English that's abnormal. So there was a word for that that you used with, you know, the moon, so to speak. Except I don't think moon was feminine in Old English. But that word came down to us as she. But originally what it just meant was that feminine gendered thing over there.

[Mike Carruthers]

So when I think of Old English, I think of words like thee and thou. And we have words for there's Old English and there's new Modern English. And so when did that change? I mean, was it just a very gradual? Because thee and thou seems like what's wrong with them? We don't use them anymore.

[John McWhorter]

Yeah, thou and thee just kind of dropped out. Thou was subject, thee was objective. Then they collapsed together. And a lot of people were using the for both, especially here in America. And then they just went away. We used to be able to draw a distinction between both singular and plural. And also there was an issue of politeness. And so you might refer to a single person as you to indicate politeness.

[Mike Carruthers]

So I want to ask you about you guys, women, and maybe more girls. Younger girls. Younger women will often be referred to as a group. Hey, do you guys want to go do something? And it's all women. Guys used to mean males, men. But guys seems to have now become just a way of saying this group of people over here. And I wonder, when did that happen? When did that change? It doesn't seem like it was that long ago that guys took on this new meaning.

[John McWhorter]

I have found one piece of evidence of it from as far back as the 50s. So it's not as brand new as many people think. But on the other hand, no, nobody was saying you guys with women in, say, 1870 or even. Even the flappers in the twenties. Et cetera. But it is occasion and controversy because it's really settled in. And I think also because alongside it has come the same women saying dude to each other. So there's this issue. Why are women talking to each other like men as if they were men? And I think a way of looking at it is that those words are just no longer gendered. When somebody says you guys and it's among women, those women do not mean you men. Guys has just completely lost its mojo in that sense. But there is controversy over it.

[Mike Carruthers]

Well, because guys and gals seem to be at one point, kind of equal words for the same, you know, different genders, but the same thing. But gals has just disappeared. Nobody says gals anymore.

[John McWhorter]

No, it's a quaint word. It's kind of like perky. Gal is kind of the way you look back to the 50s, 60s or 70s, and partly because it was highly feminized and a little bit dismissive. You know, gal kind of implied somebody who had a little bit less of a place on the totem pole than a guy. And so I can see why it's. It's falling away.

[Mike Carruthers]

Well, I think words are fascinating and really how English works and how we, you know, make it work and what's proper English and what isn't, I always find it fun to talk about. I've been Speaking with John McWhorter, who teaches linguistics, American studies, and music history at Columbia University. And he is author of the book Pronoun the Story of Us in Seven Little Words. And there's a link to that book at Amazon in the show notes. John, thanks for coming on again.

[John McWhorter]

Thank you very much for having me.

[Mike Carruthers]

Are you happy with your resume? When you're putting your resume together, it makes sense to know what prospective employers are looking for. And according to Entrepreneur magazine, here are some things to remember. The most important thing HR managers are looking for in a resume is relevant experience. If you don't have experience relevant to the job you're applying for, you're probably doomed. They also want to see that the resume was tailored specifically for the job. Generic resumes don't work very well unless you're just posting it to a job board. Specific accomplishments are far more important than vague claims of your talents. Keywords like problem solving, leadership, team building, these are all good to include in your resume. Your resume should be well organized, machine readable, and have clear contact information. What managers don't want to see are typos. References. Not yet. They'll get to that later. And they don't want to see a lot of irrelevant detail. For example, if you have college experience, you don't also need to list your high school education because you wouldn't have gone to college if you hadn't gone to high school. And that is something you should know. If you enjoyed this episode and you're not yet a follower of something you should know. The app that you're listening to this on has a follow button so that you will get episodes delivered to you when they become available. So click on that, become a follower, and then you'll never miss another episode. I'm Micah Ruthers. Thanks for listening today to something you should know.

[Speaker A]

Hey there.

[John McWhorter]

I'm Rachel Feldman and I host a.

[Mike Carruthers]

Podcast from Popular Science called the Weirdest.

[Speaker A]

Thing I Learned this Week.

[John McWhorter]

Every other week I circle up with.

[Speaker A]

Guests like Bill Nye, Josh Gondelman, Mary Roach, and many more to prove that the lofty and noble pursuit of science can also be profoundly weird. From flying Ford Pintos to the world's most illegal cheese, the weirdest thing I.

[Mike Carruthers]

Learned this week is the ultimate source.

[Speaker A]

For all things interesting, informative, and most importantly, frickin weird. Check out the weirdest thing I Learned this week. Wherever you get your podcasts, come on over whenever you're ready to get weird. Have you ever heard about the 19th century French actress with so many lovers that they formed a lovers union? Or what about the aboriginal Australian bandit who faked going into labor just to escape the police? Which she did escape from them. It was a great plan. How about the French queen who murdered her rival with poison gloves? I'm Ann Foster, host of the feminist women's history comedy podcast Vulgar History. Every week I share the saga of a woman from history whose story you probably didn't already know and you will never forget after you hear it. Sometimes we re examine well known people like Cleopatra or Pocahontas, sharing the truth behind their legends. Sometimes we look at the scandalous women you'll never find in a history textbook. Listen to Vulgar History wherever you get podcasts and if you're curious, the people I was talking about before the Australian woman is named Marianne Buggy and the French actress was named Rochelle no less. Name just Rochelle and the queen who poisoned her rival is Catherine de Medici. I have episodes about all of them.