Richard Bandler: Changing with Families - A Book About Further Education For Being Human

Many times in our experience, using the verbal techniques of de-nominalization, a family member will begin with one nominalization and, in the process of connecting it with specific experiences, will supply another nominalization as one of the missing pieces. For example,

Dave: You know, there's a lot of confusion . . .

Therapist: You feel confused about what, Dave?

Dave: Dependency makes me feel confused . . .

Notice what has happened here: Dave uses a nominalization, confusion, which is somehow connected with a part of Dave's experience which he wants to change. The therapist applies the verbal de-nominalization. Dave responds by supplying one of the missing pieces; however, the missing piece which he provides is, itself, a

nominalization. The therapist alertly applies the verbal de-nominalization again:

Therapist: Whose depending on you makes you feel confused, Dave?

This kind of cycle is one which we find frequently in our family therapy work. By systematically applying the verbal de-nominalization technique to each nominalization, the therapist succeeds in assisting the family member in identifying by exactly what process he is perceiving or failing to perceive what he is experiencing. This process of cyclic de-nominalization (by tying the word description to things which are in the "real" world of experience) allows both the therapist and the family members to understand the specific experiences which they can create together to continue the process of change and growth.

A second important pattern in this portion of the transcript is contained in the statements which Dave makes:

Dependency makes me feel tight. . .

Dependency makes me feel confused . . .

These two sentences have the same form — each of them claims that there is something (dependency) outside of the person involved in the description which causes that person to experience a certain feeling. In other words, each of these sentences claims that there is a Cause-Effect relationship over which the person involved has no control and which, literally, makes him have a certain experience.

Linguists have identified a certain class of sentences such as:

Max makes Sue weigh 357 pounds on Tuesdays.

And

Mildred forces Tom to be 8 feet tall on Saturdays.

as semantically ill-formed.[8] This category of verbal patterning — Semantic Ill-formedness — is one of the most powerful verbal patterns available to therapists and hypnotists in their communication. See pages 51-53 and 95-107 in The Structure of Magic, Volume I; and pages 146-152 and 209-215 in Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson, M.D. In the references cited, we distinguish three classes of semantic ill-formedness: Cause-Effect semantic ill-formedness, Mind Reading and Lost Performative. That is, sentences of this class make claims which are at odds with our usual understanding of the way the world operates. Specifically, these sentences claim that one person is causing another person to have a certain experience. However, since the experience which the sentences claim the second person is having is an experience which most of us consider to be beyond the conscious control of human beings, the sentences, literally, make no sense. In other words, since Sue (or anyone else) cannot control what she weighs on a certain day of the week, it makes no sense to claim that Max is causing her to control her weight in that way.

Within the context of therapy, we have found an extension of this linguistic class very useful. Specifically, any sentence such as:

He makes me sad.

is called Cause-Effect semantically ill-formed.[9] Cause-Effect semantic ill-formedness embodies all of the cases in which one person claims that another person is causing him to experience some feeling or thought, some inner state, without there being any direct physical contact between the two people. Our point is that each of us can come to have a choice about how the words, tones, body postures, movements, etc., of others will affect us. The technique of identifying Cause-Effect semantic ill-formedness by the language form in which it is presented is discussed in detail in The Structure of Magic, Volume I, pages 51-52 and 95-98; Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson, M.D., Volume I, pages 146-151 and 209-213; and The Structure of Magic, Volume II, Parts II, III, and V. Several examples may help to identify the pattern in your experience:

She makes me really mad.

He really makes her sad.

Walking along the beach makes me feel refreshed.

We understand that these sentences may be a valid description of a person's experience. However, what we are saying is that the Cause-Effect relationship which each of these sentences seems to require is not necessary. We have determined in working with people in therapy that, all too frequently, their pain and lack of freedom and choice are connected with parts of their experience which they represent in the Cause-Effect semantically ill-formed pattern we have just identified. This, typically, takes the form:

This caused that.

I am helpless.

It is final.

We have found it useful in our work to assist people in having a choice about whether a particular movement, act, smile, word, etc., from someone else necessarily has to have the effect on them that they claim. Typically, people who do not have such choices experience little or no control and responsibility over their own lives. Specifically, as therapists we have found that we can effectively assist clients in coming to have these choices by asking them to describe in detail the process by which someone causes them to feel or sense what they are experiencing. The process of assisting the one with whom we are working in understanding the specific way in which he fails to have a choice in his verbal and non-verbal communication with others typically involves the linguistic patterns we have already presented, especially de-nominalization and the specification of verbs. We have found this pattern to be a very useful model.

We return, now, to the transcript.

Dave: You know, dependency makes me feel confused.

Therapist: Hold on a minute, Dave; let me see if I understand this. When you see Marcie look at you in a certain way, you know that she's depending on you and you feel tight, is that right, Dave?

Dave: Yeah, that's right. I never have been able to get a handle on it; you know, altogether, like I felt when you just said it now.

Therapist: Let's check this out, Dave, (turning to Marcie, the wife/mother in the family) Marcie, you heard what Dave said about knowing that you're depending on him when you look at him in a certain way, and I'm wondering whether . . .

Dave: (interrupting) Yeah, you know, Marcie, like right now, when your eyes get narrow and you lean forward, I know that you're unhappy with me, and .. .

Therapist: Wait, Dave, (turning again to Marcie) Marcie, are you unhappy with Dave right now?

Marcie: No, I'm trying to understand what's going on here, and …

One of the ways in which people in families create pain and unhappiness for themselves is by assuming that they can come to know the thoughts and feelings of another person without that other person's directly communicating those thoughts and feelings. We call this Mind Reading semantic ill-formedness.[10] Mind-Reading semantic ill-formedness, along with Cause-Effect semantic ill-formedness, is the basis of much of the calibrated communication cycles which result in pain and dissatisfaction for family members. See The Structure of Magic, Volume I, pages 104-106, and Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson, M.D., Volume I, pages 151-152 and 213-215. Mind Reading occurs in any situation in which one person claims to know the inner experience of another without a direct communication of the second person's experience. Frequently, this takes the form of: