Appendix II

Hypnotic Language Patterns: The Milton–Model

Milton Erickson used language very systematically in his hypnotic work, often in unusual ways. These patterns were first described by Richard Bandler and John Grinder in their book, Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson, M.D., Vol. I.

Using this "Milton–Model" is a prerequisite to effective hypnotic communication, and all of the induction examples in this book have used these language patterns. Many readers will unconsciously begin to learn the hypnotic language patterns by reading the many examples of inductions in this book. This appendix makes these patterns more explicit, so that you can practice using one pattern at a time, in order to systematically incorporate them all into your behavior.

I. Inverse Meta–Model Patterns

Often the Milton–Model has been called the reverse of the Meta–Model. The Meta–Model is described fully in The Structure of Magic, Vol. I. by Bandler and Grinder, and there is an excellent 12–page summary of it in an appendix to They Lived Happily Ever After, by Leslie Cameron–Bandler. The Meta–Model is a set of language patterns that can be used to specify experience more fully. In contrast, the Milton–Model provides the user with ways of being "artfully vague." Being artfully vague allows a communicator to make statements that sound specific and yet are general enough to be an adequate pace for the listener's experience, no matter what that is. The Meta–Model provides ways of recovering specific information that is deleted in any sentence; the Milton–Model provides ways of constructing sentences in which almost all specific information is deleted. This requires the listener to fill in the deletions from her own unique internal experience. The Meta–Model can be conveniently divided into three chunks: A. Gathering Information, B. Semantic ill–formedness, and C. Limits of the Speaker's Model.

A. Gathering Information

As part of the Milton–Model, this chunk is called Deleting Information, and is the most useful of the three chunks for hypnotic purposes. The four sub–categories follow.

1) Nominalizations: Nominalizations are words that take the place of a noun in a sentence, but they are not tangible—they cannot be touched, felt, or heard. The test for a nominalization is "Can you put it in a wheelbarrow?" If a word is a noun and it cannot be put in a wheelbarrow, it is a nominalization. Words like curiosity, hypnosis, learnings, love, etc. are nominalizations. They are used as nouns, but they are actually process words.

Whenever a nominalization is used, much information is deleted. If I say "Emily has a lot of knowledge" I've deleted what exactly she knows and how she knows it. Nominalizations are very effective in hypnotic inductions because they allow the speaker to be vague and require the listener to search through her experience for the most appropriate meaning. Milton Erickson's inductions are filled with them.

In the following example, the nominalizations are in italics: "I know that you have a certain difficulty in your life that you would like to bring to a satisfactory resolution … and I'm not sure exactly what personal resources you would find most useful in resolving this difficulty, but I do know that your unconscious mind is better able than you to search through your experience for exactly that resource… ."

In this paragraph nothing specific is mentioned, but if this kind of statement is made to a client who has come in to resolve a problem, she will provide specific personal meanings for the nominalizations used. By using nominalizations, the hypnotist can provide useful instructions without running the risk of saying something that runs counter to the listener's internal experience.

2) Unspecified Verbs. No verb is completely specified, but verbs can be more or less specified. If a hypnotist uses relatively unspecified verbs, the listener is again forced to supply the meaning in order to understand the sentence. Words like do, fix, solve, move, change, wonder, think, sense, know, experience, understand, remember, become aware of, etc., are relatively unspecified.

The sentence "I think this is true" is less specified than " I feel this is true." In the latter sentence, we are informed as to how the person thinks. If I say "I want you to learn" I am using a very unspecified verb, since I'm not explaining how I want you to learn, or what specifically I want you to learn about what.

3) Unspecified Referential Index. This means that the noun being talked about is not specified.

"People can relax."

"This can be easily learned."

"You can notice a certain sensation."

Statements like these give the listener the opportunity to easily apply the sentence to themselves in order to understand it.

4) Deletion. This category refers to sentences in which a major noun phrase is completely missing.

For example "I know you are curious."

The object of that sentence is missing completely. The listener does not know what he is supposedly curious about. Again, the listener can fill in the blanks with whatever is relevant in her experience,

B. Semantic Ill–formedness

1) Causal Modeling, or Linkage. Using words that imply a cause–effect relationship between something that is occuring and something the communicator wants to occur invites the listener to respond as if one thing did indeed "cause" the other. There are three kinds of linkage, with varying degrees of strength.

a) The weakest kind of linkage makes use of conjunctions to connect otherwise unrelated phenomena.

"You are listening to the sound of my voice, and you can begin to relax."

"You are breathing in and out and you are curious about what you might learn."

b) The second kind of linkage makes use of words like as, when, during, and while to connect statements by establishing a connection in time.

uAs you sit there smiling, you can begin to go into a trance." "While you sway back and forth, you can relax more completely."

c) The third and strongest kind of linkage uses words actually stating causality. Words such as makes, causes, forces, and requires can be used here.

"The nodding of your head will make you relax more completely."

\

Notice that when using each kind of linkage, the communicator begins with something that is already occurring and connects to it something she wants to occur. The communicator will be most effective if she begins with the weakest form of linkage and gradually moves to a stronger form.

These forms of linkage work by implying or stating that what is occurring will cause something else to occur, and by making a gradual transition for the listener between what is occurring and some other experience. Chapters I and II of this book contain more detailed descriptions of the use of causal modeling.

2) Mind–Reading. Acting as if you know the internal experience of another person can be an effective tool to build the credibility of the hypnotist as long as the mind–reading makes use of generalized language patterns. If the mind–reading is too specific, the communicator runs the risk of saying something counter to the listener's experience, and thereby losing rapport.

"You may be wondering what I'll say next." "You're curious about hypnosis."

3) Lost Performative. Evaluative statements in which the person making the evaluation is missing (lost) from the sentence are called Lost Performatives. Statements using lost performatives can be an effective way of delivering presuppositions, as in the examples which follow.