The Australian Oxymoron Response
Created | Updated Jun 21, 2003
The Australian Oxymoron Response
Some of you may be aware of a TV show starring Dawn French called “The Vicar of Dibley”. In this comedy, one of the characters suffers from a peculiar form of Tourette’s Syndrome where he prefaces his answers to yes/no questions with “No, no, no, no, no, no, . . .” even if the answer is in the affirmative. Either the majority of Australians suffer from a more subtle form of this condition or something else is at work. (If you ever come across an Australian TV series called "Grass Roots", listen to the main character Mayor Col Dunkley. He would have to be the master of the Oxymoron response.)
I am unsure if it is a purely Australian phenomenon but it seems so.
When required to give a positive or negative response to controversial, piss-taking or ambiguous questions or statements, we can often be heard to completely contradict ourselves. For example:
Q- “You can’t be enjoying the heat up here?”
A- “Yair, no.”
This odd affectation is becoming more and more prevalent in everyday conversation. There could be a number of explanations for the Oxymoron Response. My theory (based on observation and opinion rather than serious research) is that the first part of the response is a comment on the content and the second, the actual answer. As in the above example: “Yes, I agree with your surmise. No, I don’t enjoy the heat.”
This theory can equally be applied to the humourous piss-take or controversial subjects.
Q- “You’re a bit of a dickhead, aren’t ya?”
A- “Yair, ha ha, no.”
which can be interpreted as: “Yes, very amusing but no I’m not”. On more controversial subjects:
S- “Pauline Hanson is just saying what we all think.”
R- “No, no, yair.”
Which is really: “I vehemently disagree. She is barely literate enough to voice her own name let alone the thoughts of Australians, but you are entitled to your opinion and it won’t affect our friendship, . . .yet.” (Excuse the editorial). This last can also apply when you understand the collective opinion of a certain group but don’t particularly agree with it.
The Oxymoron Response also manifests when we are sidetracked from our main argument, lose interest in, or don’t wish to pursue the current line of discussion.
S- “I know what you are saying and it should work, but have you seen what they are doing over the road? It’s working well for them, . . .we may have to tweak it a bit to get it working here. What do you think?”
R- “Yes, Yes, no, so anyway, just have a look at the proposal”
There is also a propensity for Australians to ask opposing double-barreled questions that make the Oxymoron Response mandatory. For example: “Jeez, it’s a bit chilly, eh?* You can’t be warm in that”.
Even though I am conscious of this quirky if not endearing affectation, I am at a loss to excise it from my own conversations. Next time you are amongst Australians, listen to how they respond to one another. It still raises a wry smile for mine.
*Queenslanders usually turn statements into queries by suffixing “Eh?” Perhaps they are uncomfortable having an opinion contrary to the majority and require confirmation.
Some of you may be aware of a TV show starring Dawn French called “The Vicar of Dibley”. In this comedy, one of the characters suffers from a peculiar form of Tourette’s Syndrome where he prefaces his answers to yes/no questions with “No, no, no, no, no, no, . . .” even if the answer is in the affirmative. Either the majority of Australians suffer from a more subtle form of this condition or something else is at work. (If you ever come across an Australian TV series called "Grass Roots", listen to the main character Mayor Col Dunkley. He would have to be the master of the Oxymoron response.)
I am unsure if it is a purely Australian phenomenon but it seems so.
When required to give a positive or negative response to controversial, piss-taking or ambiguous questions or statements, we can often be heard to completely contradict ourselves. For example:
Q- “You can’t be enjoying the heat up here?”
A- “Yair, no.”
This odd affectation is becoming more and more prevalent in everyday conversation. There could be a number of explanations for the Oxymoron Response. My theory (based on observation and opinion rather than serious research) is that the first part of the response is a comment on the content and the second, the actual answer. As in the above example: “Yes, I agree with your surmise. No, I don’t enjoy the heat.”
This theory can equally be applied to the humourous piss-take or controversial subjects.
Q- “You’re a bit of a dickhead, aren’t ya?”
A- “Yair, ha ha, no.”
which can be interpreted as: “Yes, very amusing but no I’m not”. On more controversial subjects:
S- “Pauline Hanson is just saying what we all think.”
R- “No, no, yair.”
Which is really: “I vehemently disagree. She is barely literate enough to voice her own name let alone the thoughts of Australians, but you are entitled to your opinion and it won’t affect our friendship, . . .yet.” (Excuse the editorial). This last can also apply when you understand the collective opinion of a certain group but don’t particularly agree with it.
The Oxymoron Response also manifests when we are sidetracked from our main argument, lose interest in, or don’t wish to pursue the current line of discussion.
S- “I know what you are saying and it should work, but have you seen what they are doing over the road? It’s working well for them, . . .we may have to tweak it a bit to get it working here. What do you think?”
R- “Yes, Yes, no, so anyway, just have a look at the proposal”
There is also a propensity for Australians to ask opposing double-barreled questions that make the Oxymoron Response mandatory. For example: “Jeez, it’s a bit chilly, eh?* You can’t be warm in that”.
Even though I am conscious of this quirky if not endearing affectation, I am at a loss to excise it from my own conversations. Next time you are amongst Australians, listen to how they respond to one another. It still raises a wry smile for mine.
*Queenslanders usually turn statements into queries by suffixing “Eh?” Perhaps they are uncomfortable having an opinion contrary to the majority and require confirmation.
