NLP metamodel

[Brother]

The first topic that should be considered within the framework of the course on NLP is the language model, or as it is also called - the metamodel. It was she who served as the foundation for all further research in this area, and led to the creation of a whole area of practical psychology. This model contributes to a better understanding of human speech, because Usually, expressing our thoughts, we cannot convey to the interlocutor with absolute accuracy what we want. Something we ourselves are silent, believing that this is understandable, but something we unintentionally distort. Therefore, our interlocutor, unless he is, of course, a psychoanalyst or a psychotherapist, cannot always understand us correctly. Consequently, we, not being experienced specialists, are not always able to fully understand a person. And to fix this,

A brief history of the creation of the metamodel

As you know, NLP appeared in the early 70s of the XX century as a result of the joint work of linguist John Grinder, who was then an assistant professor of linguistics at the University of California at Santa Cruz, and Richard Bandler, then a psychology student at the same university. Together they studied the features of the work of three successful psychotherapists: Fritz Perls - the founder of gestalt psychology, Virginia Satir - an outstanding family therapist, and Milton Erickson - a famous hypnotherapist.

Back in the 60s, Grinder for several years studied and developed transformational grammar - the science of how coding, imparting meanings and meanings to deep structures (at the level of the nervous system) is transformed into language (at the linguistic level). And already in 1975, Grinder, together with Bandler, created their own special psychotherapeutic model of the language, modeling the techniques of Perls and Satyr. Grinder and Bandler drew attention to the fact that when collecting information, these psychotherapists used a certain set of questions, and with the help of a different set of questions, they helped people reorganize their inner world. Drawing on their linguistic experience, Grinder and Bandler have developed their own meta-model that can be applied to effective communication, accelerated learning, personal change and life improvement.

The prefix "meta" comes from the Greek language and means "outside, over, around, on another level." The metamodel defines how we can use language to explain experience. It does this by reconnecting the speaker's speech and the experience on which that speech is based. Let's take a closer look at what a metamodel is.

What is a metamodel?

The metamodel of a language is an NLP technique, with the help of which, using special clarifying questions, you can better understand your interlocutor.

The main presupposition, ie that which is not subject to discussion and is perceived as true, in NLP is the principle "The map is not a territory ." Territory is understood here as a metaphor for the concept of "truth", or the concept of "objective reality", and the human perception of this reality serves as a map. No matter how skillful the card is, it will never reach truth. Each person has their own map, and the meta model shows how each person's map can be read, and sometimes even changed.

Considering that we interact with the outside world directly, you can see that we create models (maps) of the world, which we use in order to control our behavior. It is quite difficult for one person to understand the map of the world of another. And the very behavior of another person makes sense when we consider him in the context of those choices that his card makes possible for him. The models we create give us the opportunity to make sense of our own experience. They do not need to be assessed as good or bad, etc., but should be assessed from the standpoint of their usefulness for more successful and effective interaction with the outside world and other people.

We can say that the meta model gives us a special tool, using which we can get to the experience on which the words of other people are based. When we have a conversation and say something, we never make a complete description of all the thoughts behind the words. And if we made an attempt to do this, then our monologue would have no end. The reason for this is that no matter what verbal description we use, it will not be able to fully reflect our experience. Telling about something, we, in any case, will have a more complete internal reflection of what we are talking about than we can explain in words. Thus, our description is inevitably shortened. And here we come to the question of deep and surface structures.

Deep and surface structures

Deep structure is a complete inner experience of what we are trying to convey to another person. Its main part is not comprehensible, tk. one half is at levels that precede words, and the other is generally beyond what we can describe with words.

Surface structure is those words, formulations and statements with which we try to express what is at deeper levels. It arises when we set ourselves the task of somehow presenting, displaying and explaining our experience.

In the course of their research, Grinder and Bandler noticed that during the process of transition from deep structures located in the human nervous system to superficial ones, emanating from his consciousness in the form of speech, he does three things called "modeling processes." Moreover, for the most part, they are carried out by a person unconsciously. So, there are three modeling processes.

• Omission. When expressing experience and receiving information, a person is inclined to omit a fairly large part of the data that are in the deep structure. This is how the human brain works: about 2 million units of information enter it every second, and it is problematic for it to process this entire volume, so part of it is simply omitted.
• Distortion. When describing an experience, a person involuntarily distorts the structure and meaning of information, changes his perception. This ability allows a person to enjoy such things as, for example, music, literature, painting, and also gives the opportunity to dream and fantasize.
• Generalization. When new information arrives, the human brain compares it with existing similar information and generalizes. This process allows a person to quickly learn and systematize knowledge, as well as group them, contrast, compare, etc. And this, in turn, contributes to the processing of an increasing amount of data at various levels and the transition to more abstract levels of reality.

Basically, only these modeling processes are used in the metamodel, although there are others. But these three processes describe in detail how a person moves from deep structures in the depths of consciousness to surface structures that are reflected in language and speech. Those linguistic signs and questions that we will consider below will teach you to analyze surface structures and restore omitted, distorted and generalized information, since they direct the process of transition not from deep structures to superficial ones, but vice versa. Thus, hidden information becomes open to perception, which we sometimes so often lack to understand the people around us.

Linguistic Representation of Experience

To begin with, it is worth noting that representation here should be understood precisely as a person's expression of his experience through language and speech. And, as mentioned above, in the process of communication, an ordinary person unconsciously uses three main modeling processes: omission, distortion and generalization. Let's talk about each of the processes in more detail, because knowledge about these processes and the ability to apply in practice techniques based on this knowledge can greatly increase the effectiveness of communication, improve a person's ability to understand people and influence them, and also change the quality of his life. Naturally, for the better.

The first speech modeling process we will look at will be Omission.

Omission

Simple omissions

Simple omissions take place in cases where the speaker does not say anything about a person, object, relationship.

EXAMPLE:

• Statements: “I'm scared”, “I'm afraid”, “I don't know”, “It doesn't matter”, etc.
• In order to clarify or restore information, one should ask specific open-ended questions: "What causes you fear?", "Why are you afraid?", "What specifically do you not know?" .d.

Incomplete comparisons

During an incomplete comparison, a person makes a comparison, but does not go into the details of what he is comparing: people, things, objects, standards, etc. What is being compared with is a presupposition, and the necessary information arises in the one to whom it is spoken, automatically from the subconscious.

EXAMPLE:

• Words: "less", "more", "better", "richer", "closer", etc.
• Statements: "I am the best", "Worst of all", "The richest", etc. To find out the details, you should ask clarifying questions: "The best among whom?", "Worse than whom exactly?", "The richest in comparison with whom?" etc.

Lack of a reference index

In simple terms, the absence of a specific object in question: a person or an object. If there is no reference index, it is impossible to say specifically what is being said.

EXAMPLE:

• Pronouns: "They", "someone", "something", "this", etc.
• Statements: "They will not come", "It was better that way", "What happened there?" etc. To understand more specifically what is at stake, you should ask clarifying questions: "Who exactly will not come?", "How was it better?", "What happened where?" etc.

Non-specific verbs

With the help of non-specific verbs, a person describes a non-specific action, while not representing the peculiarity of the process itself. At the time when a person pronounces any phrase containing a non-specific verb, it is likely that the person to whom they are addressing will understand the meaning incorrectly, because will be able to interpret what is said in different ways.

EXAMPLE:

• Words: "grieve", "show", "demonstrate", "care", "harm", etc.
• Statements: “She hurt me,” “They showed,” “I won,” etc.
• You can find out more complete information about what the speaker means with the help of special questions: "How exactly did she harm you?", "What exactly did he show?", "How did you win?" etc. Such questions will allow us to see a more complete picture and not think out the details that can lead to erroneous judgments.

Judgments

This refers to generalized judgments without specifying specific data. As in the case of non-specific verbs, generalized judgments can lead to a distorted understanding of the meaning of the information being conveyed.

EXAMPLE:

• Statements: “It turns out that this is not enough”, “Apparently, this is not serious”, “It is obvious that this is not so”, etc.
• You can clarify the details necessary for a more accurate understanding with the help of questions: "Why does it turn out that this is not enough?", "What specifically tells you that this is not serious?" How not so? "etc.

The next modeling process we'll look at is Distortion.

Distortion

Nominalization

Nomination refers to the presentation of continuous processes as complete. The verb here turns into a noun (verbal noun). Moreover, such nouns include precisely those originating in the process. Nominalizations can be words that reflect a process, action, movement, idea, as well as rules, beliefs, values, etc. Quite a lot of information is distorted and missed during nominalization. Speaking specifically about the metamodel, we can say that nominalization is the transformation of processes of deep structures into static events of the surface.

EXAMPLE:

• Words: relationship, respect, decision, illness, love, education, etc.
• Statements: “You don't respect me,” “They have relationship problems,” “She made the wrong decision,” etc.
• It is quite easy to identify the nominalization and distinguish it from an ordinary noun, thereby making the understanding extremely accurate. To do this, you can use the classical method, namely: while talking with a person, ask yourself mentally the question: "Can I immerse what he is talking about in a wheelbarrow?" If you can, then this is a noun, and if you cannot, then this is a nominalization. In other words, if a person turns a process into a thing, you need to return everything to its place. With regard to our statements, you should ask the following questions: "How do I disrespect you?", "What exactly are the problems in their relationship?", "What exactly did she do when she made the wrong decision?" etc.

Mind reading

Mind reading should be understood as the assumption that a person has the ability to know thoughts, as well as intentions, motives, etc. another person, even if he does not directly report it. The verbal expression of mind reading can provide much more about the speaker's deep structures than any other surface structure. After all, when a person says something that involves reading minds, he projects onto another person his own thoughts, attitudes, values, etc. But in fact, his statements have little to do with who he is talking about.

EXAMPLE:

• Sayings: "I'm sure he ...", "You know better," "He doesn't believe me," etc.
• In order to bypass mind reading, you need to use simple, but very effective questions, for example: “What do you base yourself on when you say that you are sure?”, “Where did you get the idea that I know better? ”,“ What exactly says you that he doesn't believe you? "etc.
• Reverse mind reading can also be attributed to the issue of mind reading - this is the assumption of one person that other people can (or even should) read his thoughts and act accordingly.

EXAMPLE:

• Sayings: "If you loved me, you would know"
• Statement: "Well, you know me, so you need to be aware."
• In order not to fall for this trick and make the necessary clarifications, you should ask: "I love you, but what exactly should I know?" or "Yes, I know you, but what should I be aware of?"

Causal relationships

Cause-and-effect relationships include such assumptions where any action of one person contributes to the call of certain sensations and feelings in another person. A person's use of causal statements often implies that the other person must begin to behave differently.

EXAMPLE:

• Words: “because”, “force”, “how are you”, “if”, “then”, etc.
• Statements: "You piss me off," "Because of you, I ....", "If you are so, then I am so", etc.
• In order to influence another person and point out to him that he himself can understand himself deeper and control his reactions, decisions and actions, you need to ask clarifying questions. Such questions can be: "How exactly do I make you feel negative emotions?", "What exactly are you ...?", "Why does my behavior have such a strong influence on yours?" etc.
• Here, there is also a reverse causal relationship, when one person assumes unsupported responsibility for the state and behavior of others.

EXAMPLE:

• Statements: “It was I who made him worry,” “Because of me, he feels bad,” “She is ashamed of me,” etc.
• To clarify the details of the conversation and establish a more accurate understanding, you can resort to such questions as: "What exactly did you do that made him worry?" shy of you? "etc.

Complex equivalents

A person creates complex equivalents whenever he equates part of his experience (some aspect of external behavior) with its general meaning (internal state). It turns out that, based on external features, a person draws conclusions about the meaning of all experience. Complex equivalents are components of linguistic distortion, when one person ascribes some meaning to the behavior of another, without having any direct evidence of this.

EXAMPLE:

• Words reflecting equality: “this means”, “therefore”, “is”, “therefore”, etc.
• Statements: “You didn't greet me, so you don't respect me”, “Having come here, you took an important step”, “He was late, therefore, he is irresponsible”, etc.
• You can go through complex equivalents and identify the essence of the problem with the help of some questions that allow you to restore distorted or omitted information. These are questions such as: “How does the fact that I didn’t say hello mean my disrespect for you?”, “Why did you decide that coming here, I took an important step?”, “Do you think that only an irresponsible person can be late? Can't there be any good reasons at all? " etc.

Presuppositions

As mentioned at the beginning, the term "presupposition" means certain assumptions that must be true and must not be questioned. They make the statements of the person true. Thanks to presuppositions, one person can receive a lot of information about another person: his thoughts, beliefs, worldview, vision of himself, picture of the world, etc. Presuppositions are applied by a person unconsciously, covertly, and a person often does not even realize that his presuppositions say much more about him than he wishes.

EXAMPLE:

• Presuppositions can be found by looking at words such as why, if, when, etc.
• Statements: “You can work better”, “If only you could understand me”, “I see that you have changed”, etc.
• If you learn to formulate and select specific questions, you can learn a lot of interesting things about a person. For example, the question: "Can I work better for what?" will show you a certain picture of how the speaker sees the process of the activity you are doing. By asking: "What does it tell you that I don't understand you?" you will find out what worries the person and how he would like you to perceive him. And the question: "What kind of changes have you noticed in me?" will give you a more complete picture of how the person perceived you before, what he pays attention to and what is most important to him in people.

And the last modeling process we'll talk about is Generalization.

Generalization

Generality quantifiers

Quantifiers of generality are called sets of words with the help of which universal generalizations are made. They imply a certain unconditionality. Using such generalizations, a person can make any one category a reflection of a large group, although these generalizations are vague in advance and have no basis.

EXAMPLE:

• Words: "everyone", "everyone", "nobody", "always", etc.
• Sayings: "People are in a massive trance", "All who do not believe in God are lost people", "All fashion models are stupid", etc.
• It is possible to reveal the prerequisites of community quantifiers, and to find out the characteristics of a person's personality with the help of special questions: “Why do you think that people are in a trance? Are you in a trance too? What kind of trance is this? "," Have you ever met a good, but not a believer? Can't a believer be lost? What do you mean lost? "," Have you conducted a great erudition test among photo models? In your opinion, only a not very pretty girl can be smart? "etc.

Modal Operators

Modal operators have a decisive influence on the model of the human world, his train of thought and way of life. For the most part, this modeling process is reflected in the actions and deeds of a person. Thus, by identifying modal operators, people can reveal their beliefs and attitudes in the speech of other people.

EXAMPLE:

• Words: “must”, “must”, “must”, “want”, “can”, “should”, etc.
• Statements: “I urgently need to get a second higher education”, “I have to be in time for a meeting”, “You shouldn't do this”, etc.
• It is possible to penetrate the deep essence of the interlocutor's words and reveal his beliefs and attitudes with the help of special questions: “What will happen if you do not get a second higher education?”, “How can a meeting go if you are suddenly late? How will you feel? "," Why are you sure that I don't need to do this? "etc.

Lost performative

A performative is a speech act equivalent to an act. Mainly, the lost performative concerns the value judgments expressed by a person about those values in which he is firmly convinced. But expressing value judgments, a person does not speak about their source.

EXAMPLE:

• Sayings: "A real man must serve in the army", "What you say is completely absurd," "Seven do not wait for one," etc.
• It is possible to find out the specific reasons why a person expresses certain value judgments, and, possibly, even make it clear to a person that his beliefs have no basis and, accordingly, can be false, using leading questions. These questions include the following: “Who said that a real man must necessarily serve in the army?”, “Who exactly determined that my words are absurd?”, “Why seven can't wait for one? Who invented this? Why do you believe this? "etc.

Summing up the processes of linguistic representation of experience we have considered, we can say that our speech is filled with a huge number of modeling processes that distort experience. Whenever you are having a conversation with someone, try to start identifying distortions in the interlocutor's speech in the first place. After that, you can try to find generalizations. And only then should you move on to exceptions. The point is that it is the distortions that more clearly manifest themselves in surface structures. It is for this reason that, by first identifying distortions, we are able to have a more serious impact on the deep structures of a person.

Now, possessing new information, you can gradually introduce its application into your life in order to receive information about the people with whom you communicate from their deep structures. The questions that we have considered make it possible to "discern" any person in detail and to determine many of the features of his personality. Everything we have discussed above can also be successfully applied to ourselves. This practice will allow you to better understand both yourself and other people, and, therefore, will have an extremely beneficial effect on communication with others and life in general.

And finally, as an excellent logical conclusion, we should touch upon the issue of the direct use of the metamodel in everyday life.

Using the metamodel

The metamodel itself is a great way to move from surface structures (language and speech) to deep structures (mind and immediate experience). Simply put, it is a technique for effective communication. And in order for this technique to be most successful, there are seven clarifying questions that fall into three categories. We will discuss this topic below.

Collection of information

Questions 1: Who? What? Where? How? These questions apply in cases where there is no information at all or it is of a general nature.

EXAMPLE:

• Saying: "I am broken", "No one loves me"
• Question: "What makes you feel overwhelmed?", "Who specifically doesn't love you?"

Question 2: Can you project this onto yourself? This question is used to establish whether a person can refer what he says to himself.

EXAMPLE:

• Saying: "He was always unflattering about me", "They think I'm not good enough"
• Question: "Can you say that you always spoke unflatteringly about him?", "Can you say that you think they are not good enough?"

Expanding boundaries

Question 3: What is stopping you? What happens if you don't? These questions apply when a person says that he cannot do something, must do something, or should do something.

EXAMPLE:

• Saying: "I have to do it by all means", "I had to see it"
• Question: "What will happen if you do not do this?", "What changed the fact that you didn't see it?"

Question 4: Can you recall such situations when you did something or, conversely, did not do something? This question is asked if a person often uses the words: "everything", "never", "always."

EXAMPLE:

• Saying: "After all, I always do this", "I never succeeded"
• Question: "Can you remember a case when you acted differently?", "Can you remember the moment when you did it?"

Changing values

Question 5: How did you know? This question is used in the event that the process of reading minds is manifested.

EXAMPLE:

• Saying: "I'm sure she will leave me", "I knew it"
• Question: “What makes up your confidence that she will leave you?”, “How did you know this? What exactly did you know? "

Question 6: How did they make you feel this way? This question should be asked if there is a violation of causation.

EXAMPLE:

• Saying: "It hurts me that I offended him", "She is definitely unhappy with me"
• Question: “Why are you sure that he is offended? What exactly did you do? "," Why do you think that your actions affect her so much? "

Question 7: Who? In relation to whom? This question should be asked if you hear unconfirmed opinions.

EXAMPLE:

• Saying: "Her irresponsibility annoys me", "They acted so ugly"
• Question: “Who said that it was irresponsible?”, “They acted ugly in relation to whom? Ugly from whose point of view? "

It should be noted that, despite the many theoretical prerequisites that take place when obtaining information, only seven questions are used for its accurate interpretation. It is also important that while practicing in the application of the metamodel, you should always pay attention to those processes that take place inside your consciousness, because you can begin to make judgments based on your personal experience. But what means one thing to you may mean something completely different to your interlocutor. And this is fraught with the fact that to understand another person you will begin to use your own system of interpreting experience, and not someone else's. Therefore, in addition to the above, we provide some valuable tips to help you absorb new material at a deeper level and make its application more effective.

1. Apply the metamodel to your way of thinking. Pay attention to what templates you yourself use when thinking about something, what words you say to yourself. This will help you identify your pros and cons, as well as remove existing mental blockages and more accurately begin to understand yourself.

2. Apply the meta model when talking to any person you have come across. Formulate your statements based on the material you read. So you can learn, again, to identify your own thought patterns, as well as more clearly convey to the interlocutor what you want to convey.

3. Continue to apply the questions we discussed above, even after reaching an understanding. Over time, this will become your new habit, and you will bring the use of the metamodel to automaticity.

4. Remember: whenever you ask questions from the meta model, lower your tone of voice and formulate the question according to the situation. This manner of conducting a conversation will never cause hostility or rejection in your interlocutor and will make you, on the contrary, a more pleasant and tactful person in communication.

5. Be aware that over-engaging in asking questions from the metamodel can exacerbate the situation and negatively affect communication. Use the questions presented only when really necessary.

6. When asking questions, you must clearly understand what you are asking them for. There are situations when mutual understanding can be achieved in other ways, and they should not be neglected. But despite this, always listen carefully to the interlocutor and compare what he says with what you know about the meta model. This practice will allow you to learn how to quickly identify patterns in other people's speech and define modeling processes.

7. In those cases when you need to get the most accurate information and understand another person, use the metamodel unobtrusively, playfully, asking maybe even childish questions. Behave as if you have no idea of any meta model.

8. When trying to get the information you need, be clear about what you already know and what you don't know. When communicating, take into account any details that characterize your personal feelings. It can be some kind of irritation, discomfort, apprehension, etc. These signals are the keys to building unique and effective communication.

9. Try to develop your intuition and inner flair for such moments that need clarification. This will save you the time spent trying to understand the problem and find the right solution.

10. While listening to the interlocutor, pay special attention to the timbre and tone of his voice, notice repetitions, identify the relationship of words.
They are also pointers on the path to understanding the speaker. Correlate all this with what you have read and, having drawn conclusions, take action.