We already saw that our minds, based on sensory stimuli perceived
from the environment, has within it a map of reality which
contains all our personal beliefs about the world. But this map
not really, it just has a similar structure to help us
we explain what happens.
Formation of our papers is subject to three distinct processes, which a
is unique and different from other human beings:
SELECTION – because, of all the data we have available in
environment, we select the only a small
Distortion, because the data can be wrong or corrupted by prejudices
our
Generalization situations when transportation asemenatoare what I learned
in a particular situation.
The same mechanisms come into play when communicating verbally with ourselves or with
others, or we try to give a verbal description of our model
world.
It is essential therefore to have available a language tool that
allow us beyond the procedures of selection, distortion and
generalization, to recover sensory experience that underlies a
specific statements.
Do not forget that these studies were born in psychotherapy, where
is fundamental to understand what lies behind what
says the patient.
When he uses phrases like: “I am always depressed”, “All are
against me “,” My wife makes me angry “is obviously used
labels do not describe the type of experience not referred.

In 60 years a group led by N. Chomsky linguists have developed a model
formal language called “Grammar Trasfunctionala”. Of
their work, here’s what interests us:

- Language operaza constant at two levels: it has a structure
surface, which is formulating sentences, and a deep structure that is
actual sensory experience that lies behind language.
- There are rules that allow each speaker knows to be
determine whether a sentence is well formed, in terms
grammatical, syntactic, semantic.
- To break the pattern or phrase is not well formed when only one
not possible to reach the deeper structure.

The explanation given by Korzybski and Chomski were so complicated that
were almost useless, until J. Grinder and R. Bandler (NLP founders)
Language metamodel developed.
But even this is a complex instrument, which occupies two volumes of
“The Structure of Magic” (1975, Palo Alto, California), and that requires a
serious study. We give here a version of the metamodel, which, even
simplified, allows us to get results that will be above
expectations.

An axiom of communications said: “First try to understand and
Following do you understand “.
To understand something we are not clear, it is best to put
questions.
But not always easy to ask the right questions, particularly when
know exactly what you want.
Metamodel has defined several categories of words that we report that
our interlocutor not to communicate his thoughts exactly.
These categories are: universal words, obligations, verbs, names,
comparative.
See them all, learning to recognize them and to put questions
appropriate.

UNIVERSAL WORDS
When we encounter is clear that there is a generalization. They are identified in
words like “all, none, always, never”, even if they
are sometimes just subantelese.
Universalele are best when describing the obvious truths (”All individuals
need oxygen “), but usually are just mental laziness and support
more limited opportunities they have available.
“Young people today do not feel like work” (it goes without saying: all, never).
“To start an activity requires more capital” (the
inferred-always).
“All Scots are avaricious”
and may continue indefinitely.
To interrupt this process, is enough to put some
simple questions: “Even all?”, “always really?”, “Even
one? “with all possible, so as to define
specific case in which that statement is true (recognizing it as
such).

OBLIGATIONS
Obligations, is expressed with “should not be, can not,
require, need, including all equivalent expressions.
Every time you hear these words, we face an obligation or
limitation that may be true or not.
Usually respond with “Why?” Which serves only to produce
justifications, rationalizations, examples of previous cases or regulations.
Instead, questions may be:
“What would happen if I do it? Or if I do it? “
“Who or what made me or hinder me?”
“Who says?”
And usually answers a number of possibilities open to non-
you thought.

VERB
In this category, as the next objective is that of
check that the speaker attaches significance of words and
can be obtained easily, for verbs, the word “How”.
“You have to trust me” (not clear if and
can accept advice or if he can leave the wallet and keys
house).
Question: “How? What should I do to trust? “
“This year we beat the competition!” (May mean that we want to increase
advertising costs or intend to give fire plants
competitors).
Question: “How do we fight? What actions are actually taken? “.

A particular case is the verb “To try to …” that means you already
an alibi in case of failure (”I tried everything possible, but not
funtion “).
Again, to check how it intends to act at specific
talking.

NAME
And here is enough to wonder: “What?”.
Remember when we quote politicians who speak of “prosperity”,
“Development”, “freedom”, etc.?
The question is: “What do you mean exactly by prosperity?” And, if not
lacking courage or evil: “What means intend to
accomplish? And when? “.
Note the nonspecific nouns which immediately fades conversation:
phrases like “they do not understand me”, “state does not help us” have no
meaning you do not define who are “they” or who is “State”.

COMPARATIVE
This category includes all the adjectives in the comparative degree:
“Better”, “worse”, “too much”, “too little” etc.
“It is better to do so”.
“It’s the worst that could happen to me”.
“This object is too expensive”.
“You learn very little”.
And here we react out of habit with a “why” or denying, or providing
justification. Instead, the key question is: “Compared to what?”. Of
Again, answers will help to better assess the situation and find
creative solutions.

WARNING!
Despite the apparent harmlessness, you will realize, in concrete cases,
that these questions stick to swords.
If one who is speaking in bad faith, he will feel found
if good faith, will be in front of their confusion, in
Either way, expect the aggressive and hostile reactions.
Especially at first, limit yourself to asking questions only when you
indeed seems necessary to better identify the problem or thought
party, or to develop creative solutions, avoid in any case
putting them in an aggressive tone (unless you want to deliberate attack
interlocutor).
Let us always remember that it takes to communicate with a mind
benchmark.
A good way to learn these things and call them automatically is to
listen to interviews on television (even recorded them) and imagine
most appropriate questions.
Once here, during a seminar might proceed to examples and
practical applications of what they said.
I merely supplied a few examples, again confident in
intelligence and intuition readers:

Bogdan, seven years, comes from the school:
- Mother, today colleagues have mocked me all day!
- Indeed all day?
- Well, no. During recreation.
- Even kids who were there?
- No, Julian with the gang.
- And there are many?
- I’m Julian, and George Michael.
- How have you abused?
- They said they ear!
- And others?
- Well, I have defended.

How much to change the situation to the original statement?

A random during a sale:
- Your seminar is too expensive!
Here, usually respond that is not true and is trying to
explain why.
But the correct solution is:
- Too expensive compared to what?
- Unlike other seminars that I attended.
- At the seminar you attended?
- The x, y, z.
- Well. In what sense were the same as mine?
- You know, actually were not the same.
- Interesting. What would happen if you find my seminar worth
rightful time and money?
- Then I would find my taste.
- What can I do to help you think so right?
- Here’s why: if in your seminary would talk about W, J, K, I
satisfied.
- Perfect. You see, the presentation brochure can not write everything, but
we take exactly what you want.
Obviously, the contract was signed.

One last thing: very productive use of the model that you I
proposed, when it was learned correctly, the dialogue application
Our inside. Get used to think, with maximum attention to
generalities our limits we usually ask them and
we find that often do not have any real meaning and can be very simple
overcome. The world contains many more possibilities than our little
mental map can make us believe, and these questions can be
help you to discover them.
Finish, tied it with a quotation from an anonymous Persian, which
always fascinated me: “There are a hundred roads that lead to paradise:
ninety-nine are for smart people, and one for
others “