Meta Model:  Simple Deletions

Simple deletions happen when speaker’s internal processes, assumptions, or evidence behind their statement.  When using the Meta Model to address Simple Deletion, “How do you know?” questions challenge the source of the speaker’s information or reasoning. This type of language interrupt digs deeper into the speaker’s internal processes, assumptions, or evidence behind their statement.

Here are examples of Simple Deletion paired with a “How do you know?” language interrupt:

1. Example:

Statement: “I am upset.”

Language Interrupt: “How do you know you are upset?”

– Explanation: This interrupt challenges the speaker to reflect on the criteria or signals they use to determine their emotional state.

2. Example:

Statement: “This isn’t working.”

Language Interrupt: “How do you know it’s not working?”

– Explanation: The interrupt asks the speaker to provide evidence or explain how they reached the conclusion that something isn’t working.

3. Example:

Statement: “We need to change things.”

Language Interrupt: “How do you know these things need changing?”

– Explanation: This interrupt challenges the speaker to explain the reasoning or evidence that supports the need for change.

4. Example:

Statement: “I’m worried.”

Language Interrupt: “How do you know you should be worried?”

– Explanation: Here, the interrupt questions the speaker’s decision-making process and whether their worry is based on a valid concern.

5. Example:

Statement: “That was a bad decision.”

Language Interrupt: “How do you know it was a bad decision?”

– Explanation: The interrupt encourages the speaker to reflect on what criteria they used to judge the decision as “bad.”

In these examples, the “How do you know?” question prompts the speaker to uncover the underlying process or evidence that supports their statement, filling in the missing information that was deleted.

Meta Model – Unspecified Nouns

In the Meta Model, “Missing Nouns” (also known as “Unspecified Nouns”) occurs when a noun is referenced, but its identity is unclear. This creates ambiguity in communication. A language interrupt helps clarify the meaning by asking for specifics about the missing noun.

Here are examples of Missing Nouns paired with language interrupts:

1. Example:

Statement: “They’re not helping.”

Language Interrupt: “Who exactly is not helping?”

– Explanation: The noun “they” is unspecified. The language interrupt seeks to clarify who “they” refers to.

2. Example:

Statement: “That needs to be fixed.”

Language Interrupt: “What exactly needs to be fixed?”

– Explanation: The noun “that” is vague. The interrupt asks for clarification on what specifically needs fixing.

3. Example:

Statement: “Everyone is talking about it.”

Language Interrupt: “Who exactly is everyone, and what are they talking about?”

– Explanation: “Everyone” and “it” are unspecified nouns. The language interrupt asks for details on both the people and the subject.

4. Example:

Statement: “Something needs to change.”

Language Interrupt: “What specifically needs to change?”

– Explanation: The noun “something” is unclear. The interrupt prompts the speaker to specify what needs to be changed.

5. Example:

Statement: “We’re dealing with it.”

Language Interrupt: “What exactly are you dealing with?”

– Explanation: The noun “it” is unspecified. The language interrupt seeks clarification on what “it” refers to.

These examples show how language interrupts can be used to address Missing Nouns by prompting the speaker to provide the missing details, resulting in clearer and more specific communication.

Meta Model – Unspecified Verbs

In the Meta Model, “Unspecified Verbs” occur when a verb is used without enough detail to understand what action is being taken or how it is being performed. A language interrupt can help clarify what the speaker means by prompting them to specify the action.

Here are examples of Unspecified Verbs paired with language interrupts:

1. Example:

Statement: “She hurt me.”

Language Interrupt: “How exactly did she hurt you?”

– Explanation: The verb “hurt” is unspecified. The interrupt asks for clarification on what the speaker means by “hurt.”

2. Example:

Statement: “He fixed it.”

Language Interrupt: “How did he fix it?”

– Explanation: The verb “fixed” is vague. The interrupt seeks details about how the fixing was done.

3. Example:

Statement: “They handled the situation.”

Language Interrupt: “How exactly did they handle the situation?”

– Explanation: The verb “handled” is unspecified. The interrupt prompts the speaker to explain how the situation was managed.

4. Example:

Statement: “We improved the process.”

Language Interrupt: “In what specific ways did you improve the process?”

– Explanation: The verb “improved” lacks details. The interrupt seeks specifics on the actions taken to make improvements.

5. Example:

Statement: “I learned a lot.”

Language Interrupt: “How exactly did you learn, and what did you learn?”

– Explanation: The verb “learned” is vague. The interrupt asks for the method and details of what was learned.

These examples demonstrate how language interrupts can be used to challenge Unspecified Verbs, prompting the speaker to clarify the specific actions or processes involved.

Meta Model – Comparative Deletions

In the Meta Model, “Comparative Deletion” (also known as an “incomplete comparison”) occurs when a comparison is made without specifying what is being compared to. The listener is left guessing what the reference point is. A language interrupt can help by asking for clarification.

Here are examples of Comparative Deletion with language interrupts:

1. Example:

Statement: “She is better.”

Language Interrupt: “Better than who or what exactly?”

– Explanation: The comparison “better” is incomplete because it does not specify what or who she is being compared to.

2. Example:

Statement: “This process is faster.”

Language Interrupt: “Faster than what process?”

– Explanation: The statement is vague because it does not indicate what the process is faster than. The interrupt asks for the missing reference.

3. Example:

Statement: “He is more successful.”

Language Interrupt: “More successful than who or in what way?”

– Explanation: The comparison “more successful” lacks a reference point, and the interrupt asks for clarification.

4. Example:

Statement: “This option is cheaper.”

Language Interrupt: “Cheaper compared to what?”

– Explanation: The comparison “cheaper” is incomplete, as the reference for comparison is missing. The interrupt seeks that information.

5. Example:

Statement “She is happier now.”

Language Interrupt: “Happier than when, or compared to what?”

– Explanation: The statement implies a comparison of happiness, but it is unclear what the reference point is. The interrupt helps fill in the gap.

These examples show how Comparative Deletion leads to ambiguity and how a language interrupt can be used to prompt the speaker to clarify the comparison, making the communication clearer and more specific.

Meta Model – Nominalization

In the Meta Model, “Nominalization” occurs when a verb or process is turned into a noun, making it seem static and unchangeable. This can obscure the dynamic nature of the process. A language interrupt can help by turning the noun back into a verb or asking for clarification on the process.

Here are examples of Nominalization with language interrupts:

1. Example:

Statement: “Our communication is poor.”

Language Interrupt: “How specifically are you communicating poorly?”

– Explanation: “Communication” is a nominalization of the process of communicating. The interrupt shifts focus back to the action, asking about the specific ways communication is poor.

2. Example:

Statement: “Their decision was unfair.”

Language Interrupt: “How did they decide, and what made it unfair?”

– Explanation: “Decision” is a nominalization of the action “to decide.” The interrupt seeks to understand the process behind the decision and why it was deemed unfair.

3. Example:

Statement: “There has been a lack of progress.”

Language Interrupt: “What specifically hasn’t progressed, and how are you measuring it?”

– Explanation: “Progress” is a nominalization, turning the action of progressing into a static concept. The interrupt helps to clarify what actions or processes are not moving forward and how that’s being measured.

4. Example:

Statement: “Her success is inspiring.”

Language Interrupt: “How has she succeeded, and what specifically is inspiring you?”

– Explanation: “Success” is a nominalization of the action “to succeed.” The interrupt brings attention back to the specific actions that led to success and the elements that are inspiring.

5. Example:

Statement: “We need more organization.”

Language Interrupt: “How exactly do you want to organize things, and in what areas?”

– Explanation: “Organization” is a nominalization of the process of organizing. The interrupt prompts the speaker to describe the specific actions they want to take to create more organization.

In these examples, the language interrupts challenge the static nature of nominalizations, encouraging the speaker to describe the dynamic actions or processes behind the nouns, making the communication clearer and more actionable.

Meta Model – Mindread

In the Meta Model, “Mind Reading” refers to when someone claims to know what another person is thinking or feeling without direct evidence. A language interrupt challenges this assumption, asking for clarification on how the speaker knows what they claim.

Here are examples of Mind Reading with language interrupts:

1. Example:

Statement: “He doesn’t like me.”

Language Interrupt: “How do you know he doesn’t like you?”

– Explanation: The statement assumes knowledge of someone else’s feelings. The interrupt challenges the assumption, asking for evidence.

2. Example:

Statement: “She thinks I’m not capable.”

Language Interrupt: “How do you know she thinks that?”

– Explanation: The speaker assumes they know another person’s thoughts. The interrupt asks for the basis of this belief.

3. Example:

Statement: “They’re upset with me.”

Language Interrupt: “How do you know they’re upset with you?”

– Explanation: The statement involves an assumption about someone else’s emotions. The interrupt seeks clarification on how the speaker knows this.

4. Example:

Statement: “My boss is disappointed in my work.”

Language Interrupt: “How do you know your boss is disappointed?”

– Explanation: The speaker assumes knowledge of their boss’s internal state. The interrupt challenges this assumption by asking for evidence or reasoning.

5. Example:

Statement: “Everyone thinks I’m wrong.”

Language Interrupt: “How do you know everyone thinks that?”

– Explanation: The speaker assumes that they know what others think. The interrupt challenges this by asking for specifics on how the speaker knows what others are thinking.

In these examples, the language interrupts prompt the speaker to question their assumptions about others’ thoughts or feelings, bringing the conversation back to observable facts and clarifying the basis for the mind reading.

Meta Model – Lost Performative

In the Meta Model, “Lost Performative” occurs when a value judgment or opinion is stated without specifying who is making that judgment. The speaker presents the opinion as though it is a universal truth, but the source of the judgment is missing. A language interrupt helps identify the source of the opinion or judgment.

Here are examples of Lost Performative with language interrupts:

1. Example:

Statement: “That’s so wrong.”

Language Interrupt: “According to whom?”

– Explanation: The judgment “wrong” is presented without specifying who thinks it’s wrong. The interrupt seeks to identify the person or group making the judgment.

2. Example:

Statement: “It’s important to be on time.”

Language Interrupt: “Who says so?”

– Explanation: The statement presents “importance” as a general truth without indicating whose value system this comes from. The interrupt clarifies the source of the judgment.

3. Example:

Statement: “That’s the best way to do it.”

Language Interrupt: “Best according to whom?”

– Explanation: The statement assumes “best” without indicating whose standards or criteria are being used. The interrupt prompts the speaker to specify the source.

4. Example:

Statement: “It’s bad to waste time.”

Language Interrupt: “Who thinks it’s bad to waste time?”

– Explanation: The judgment “bad” is not attributed to anyone. The interrupt seeks to identify whose perspective this judgment is based on.

5. Example:

Statement: “You should always work hard.”

Language Interrupt: “According to whom?”

– Explanation: The statement presents the value of working hard as universal, without specifying the source. The interrupt asks for clarification on who holds this belief.

In these examples, the language interrupts challenge the Lost Performative by asking the speaker to identify the source of the judgment or belief, helping to clarify whether it is their own opinion or someone else’s.

Meta Model – Cause and Effect

In the Meta Model, “Cause and Effect” refers to when a speaker assumes that one event or action directly causes another, often without sufficient evidence. This structure can create limiting beliefs. A language interrupt challenges the assumed cause-and-effect relationship, asking the speaker to clarify or question the connection.

Here are examples of Cause and Effect with language interrupts:

1. Example:

Statement: “You make me angry.”

Language Interrupt: “How exactly do I make you angry?”

– Explanation: The speaker assumes that another person is the cause of their anger. The interrupt challenges this by asking how the speaker is attributing their emotional state to the other person.

2. Example:

Statement: “If I fail, it will ruin everything.”

Language Interrupt: “How exactly will failing ruin everything?”

– Explanation: The statement assumes that failing will have a catastrophic effect on everything. The interrupt questions this connection and asks for specifics on how failure leads to such an outcome.

3. Example:

Statement: “She’s always late, and that’s why I’m stressed.”

Language Interrupt: “How does her being late cause you to be stressed?”

– Explanation: The speaker assumes that someone else’s behavior directly causes their stress. The interrupt challenges the link between the two events.

4. Example:

Statement: “If they don’t listen, I can’t be successful.”

Language Interrupt: “How does their not listening prevent you from being successful?”

– Explanation: The speaker assumes that their success is directly dependent on others’ actions. The interrupt asks for clarification on how this cause-and-effect relationship works.

5. Example:

Statement: “Criticism always makes me feel bad.”

Language Interrupt: “How does criticism make you feel bad?”

– Explanation: The speaker assumes that external criticism automatically causes negative feelings. The interrupt challenges this assumption by asking the speaker to reflect on the connection.

In these examples, the language interrupts challenge the assumed cause-and-effect relationships by asking the speaker to explain or reconsider the connection between the events, leading to a clearer understanding and less restrictive thinking.

Meta Model – Complex Equivalence

In the Meta Model, “Complex Equivalence” occurs when a person equates two different things, assuming that one thing means or is equivalent to another. This can create limiting beliefs or misunderstandings because the relationship between the two things might not be as strong or direct as assumed. A language interrupt can challenge this equivalence, prompting the speaker to explain or reconsider the connection.

Here are examples of Complex Equivalence with language interrupts:

1. Example:

Statement: “She didn’t say hello, so she must be angry with me.”

Language Interrupt: “How does not saying hello mean she’s angry with you?”

– Explanation: The speaker equates the action of not saying hello with being angry. The interrupt challenges this assumption by questioning the connection between the two events.

2. Example:

Statement: “He missed the meeting, which means he doesn’t care about the project.”

Language Interrupt: “How does missing the meeting mean he doesn’t care about the project?”

– Explanation: The speaker assumes that missing a meeting is equivalent to not caring. The interrupt prompts the speaker to clarify how they made this connection.

3. Example:

Statement: “If you loved me, you would have called.”

Language Interrupt: “How does not calling mean I don’t love you?”

– Explanation: The speaker equates the act of calling with love, implying that not calling equals a lack of love. The interrupt challenges this by asking for clarification on how the two are related.

4. Example:

Statement: “I didn’t get the job, so I must not be good enough.”

Language Interrupt: “How does not getting the job mean you’re not good enough?”

– Explanation: The speaker equates not getting a job with a lack of personal worth. The interrupt challenges this assumption by asking how the two are connected.

5. Example:

Statement: “She always interrupts me, which means she doesn’t respect me.”

Language Interrupt: “How does her interrupting you mean she doesn’t respect you?”

– Explanation: The speaker assumes that interruptions equate to a lack of respect. The interrupt questions this link, encouraging the speaker to rethink the relationship.

In these examples, the language interrupts challenge the Complex Equivalence by asking the speaker to explain the reasoning behind their assumption, leading to a more nuanced and less rigid understanding of the relationship between the two concepts.

Meta Model Pre-suppositions

In the Meta Model, “Presuppositions” are underlying assumptions or beliefs that are taken for granted in a statement. These assumptions are often not explicitly stated but are necessary for the statement to make sense. A language interrupt can challenge these presuppositions by questioning or clarifying them.

Here are examples of Presuppositions with language interrupts:

1. Example:

Statement: “Why did you stop doing that?”

Language Interrupt: “What makes you assume I stopped doing that?”

• Explanation: The question presupposes that the person has stopped doing something. The interrupt challenges this assumption by questioning the basis for the belief.

2. Example:

Statement: “When will you finish the project?”

Language Interrupt: “How is it assumed that I am currently working on the project?”

• Explanation: The statement presupposes that the person is working on the project. The interrupt challenges this by questioning the assumption that work is ongoing.

3. Example:

Statement: “Since you’re not interested, I won’t bother you anymore.”

Language Interrupt: “What makes you believe that I’m not interested?”

• Explanation: The statement presupposes a lack of interest on the part of the listener. The interrupt challenges this assumption by asking for the basis of this belief.

4. Example:

Statement: “Since you’re not interested, why did you attend the meeting?”

Language Interrupt: “What makes you think I’m not interested?”

• Explanation: The statement presupposes disinterest on the part of the listener. The interrupt seeks to uncover why this assumption is made.

5. Statement: “How can you improve your performance at work?”

Language Interrupt: “What makes you think that performance needs improvement?”

• Explanation: The statement presupposes that the speaker’s performance needs improvement. The interrupt questions the basis for this assumption.

In these examples, the language interrupts challenge the underlying presuppositions by asking for clarification on the assumptions being made. This helps to reveal and examine the beliefs or assumptions behind the statements, leading to more informed and reflective conversations.

Meta Model – Model Operators of Necessity

In the NLP Meta Model, “Model Operators of Necessity” refer to terms that express necessity, obligation, or requirement. These operators indicate that the speaker perceives certain conditions or actions as unavoidable or mandatory. Common terms include “must,” “should,” “have to,” and “need to,”

These operators can create rigid thinking or unrealistic expectations if not examined or questioned. Here’s how you can address them with language interrupts:

1. Example:

Statement: “I must get this report done by tomorrow.”

Language Interrupt: “What would happen if you didn’t complete the report by tomorrow?”

– Explanation: The term “must” indicates a strong necessity. The interrupt questions the consequence of not meeting the deadline to understand the true need or flexibility.

2. Example:

Statement: “You should always be on time.”

Language Interrupt: “Why is it important to always be on time?”

– Explanation: The term “should” implies an obligation. The interrupt seeks to uncover the underlying reason or significance behind this expectation.

3. Example:

Statement: “I have to follow this procedure.”

Language Interrupt: “What specifically requires you to follow this procedure?”

– Explanation: The term “have to” suggests a requirement. The interrupt asks for the source or authority behind this necessity to clarify its validity or flexibility.

4. Example:

Statement: “We need to finish this project by next week.”

Language Interrupt: “What makes it necessary to finish by next week?”

– Explanation: The term “need to” expresses a perceived necessity. The interrupt aims to uncover the reason or urgency behind the deadline.

5. Example:

Statement: “They must follow the rules.”

Language Interrupt: “What are the consequences if they don’t follow the rules?”

– Explanation: The term “must” indicates a strong requirement. The interrupt seeks to understand the impact or importance of adherence to the rules.

These language interrupts challenge the rigid thinking associated with Model Operators of Necessity, helping to explore the underlying reasons and potential flexibility behind perceived obligations or constraints.

Meta Model – Model operators of Possibility

In the NLP Meta Model, “Model Operators of Possibility” refer to terms that express potential or capability. They indicate what a person believes might be possible or achievable. Common operators of possibility include “can,” “could,” “might,” “may,” and “possible.” While these terms suggest potential, they can also be vague and need clarification to understand the speaker’s true beliefs or limitations.

Here’s how to address these operators with language interrupts:

1. Example:

Statement: “I might be able to finish this project on time.”

Language Interrupt: “What would need to happen for you to finish the project on time?”   – Explanation: The term “might” expresses potential but lacks certainty. The interrupt seeks to clarify what conditions or actions would enable the completion of the project.

2. Example:

Statement: “We could improve our sales if we tried a new strategy.”

Language Interrupt: “What specifically would you need to do to improve sales with a new strategy?”

– Explanation: The term “could” indicates potential but doesn’t specify how it could be achieved. The interrupt aims to uncover the actions or steps needed for improvement.

3. Example:

Statement: “It’s possible that the meeting will be canceled.”

Language Interrupt: “What factors make it possible for the meeting to be canceled?”

– Explanation: The term “possible” suggests that something might happen, but lacks detail. The interrupt seeks to identify the factors or conditions that contribute to this possibility.

4. Example:

Statement: “She may come to the event.”

Language Interrupt: “What would influence her decision to come to the event?”

– Explanation: The term “may” indicates potential attendance but doesn’t specify what might affect the decision. The interrupt explores what factors could impact her choice.

5. Example:

Statement: “You can achieve this goal if you work hard.”

Language Interrupt: “What exactly needs to happen for you to achieve this goal?”

– Explanation: The term “can” expresses capability but lacks detail on how to achieve the goal. The interrupt seeks specifics about the actions required.

6. Example:

Statement: “It could be possible to expand our market.”

Language Interrupt: “What steps would need to be taken to make market expansion possible?”

– Explanation: The term “could be possible” suggests potential but doesn’t specify how to realize it. The interrupt aims to clarify the actions or conditions needed for market expansion.

7. Example:

Statement: “I can’t handle this amount of work.”

Language Interrupt: “What makes you think you can’t handle this amount of work?”

-Explanation: The term “can’t” implies a limitation on handling work. The interrupt seeks to explore the reasons behind this belief and whether there are any strategies or resources that could help manage the workload.

8. Example:

Statement: “We can’t increase our sales this quarter.”

Language Interrupt: “What factors are leading you to believe that increasing sales is impossible this quarter?”

-Explanation: The term “can’t” indicates that increasing sales is perceived as unachievable. The interrupt asks for specifics about the factors contributing to this belief and whether any adjustments could change the situation.

These language interrupts help to explore and clarify the potential or capabilities suggested by Model Operators of Possibility, turning vague possibilities into actionable steps or conditions.

Meta Model Universal Quantifiers

In the NLP Meta Model, “Universal Quantifiers” are words or phrases that generalize across all instances or situations. Common universal quantifiers include “always,” “never,” “everyone,” “nobody,” and “everything.” These terms imply that a statement applies universally, which can be limiting or overly broad.

Language interrupts can challenge these universal statements by asking for specifics or exceptions, helping to clarify and refine the speaker’s generalizations.

Here are examples of Universal Quantifiers with language interrupts:

1. Example:

Statement: “She always interrupts me during meetings.”

Language Interrupt: “Can you give me specific examples of times when she interrupted you?”

– Explanation: The term “always” generalizes the frequency of interruptions. The interrupt seeks to identify specific instances to assess whether the generalization is accurate.

2. Example:

Statement: “Nobody listens to my ideas.”

Language Interrupt: “Are there any times when someone has listened to your ideas?”

– Explanation: The term “nobody” generalizes that no one listens. The interrupt questions this by asking for exceptions or specific instances where listening occurred.

3. Example:

Statement: “Everything goes wrong when I try to plan something.”

Language Interrupt: “What are some examples of times when things went right while you were planning?”

– Explanation: The term “everything” suggests that all planning efforts fail. The interrupt seeks to find instances where planning was successful to challenge the broad generalization.

4. Example:

Statement: “Everyone at work is unhappy with the new policy.”

Language Interrupt: “Can you identify any individuals who are satisfied with the new policy?”

– Explanation: The term “everyone” generalizes that all individuals are unhappy. The interrupt looks for exceptions to challenge the universal claim.

5. Example:

Statement: “I never get any support from my team.”

Language Interrupt: “Can you recall any instances where you received support from your team?”

– Explanation: The term “never” generalizes that no support is ever given. The interrupt asks for specific examples where support was received, questioning the absolute nature of the statement.

6. Example:

Statement: “They always criticize my work.”

Language Interrupt: “Are there any instances when they offered positive feedback on your work?”

– Explanation: The term “always” suggests constant criticism. The interrupt asks for examples of positive feedback to challenge the broad generalization.

By using these interrupts, you can help individuals break down their universal statements into more specific and manageable parts, leading to a more accurate and nuanced understanding of their experiences.