There is a common [though disputed] statistic that 93% or so of communication is Non-verbal. That is to say, Gestures and Body language take a majority share in sending a message, to the point that words aren’t needed.
Does this number change based on what language the sender is using?
Granted numbers can vary, and YMMV, but I would think that some languages use gestures more, or less, than others.
A lot of nonverbal communication is culture-, not language-based. Certain basic facial expressions are generally regarded as universal, however that may also be a matter of culture, specifically differing on an Eastern/Western basis. For example many Chinese may smile when discussing something sad or uncomfortable.
When you get below the neck, gestures and body movements have wildly differing meanings to different cultures. A simple, harmless to you or me “thumbs up” is considered a vulgar gesture in Iran. Nodding your head up and down does not always mean “yes”. Finger pointing differs almost everywhere.
This has always bothered me. 90+%. really?! 90+% is non-verbal?
I’ve always assumed this was just total BS that someone delivering a communication seminar made up many years ago that just took off.
How do they quantify “communication”, and how do they define “non-verbal”? Without knowing these it’s impossible to answer your question.
Well, you have to remember that 82.6% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
What you are both failing to understand is that “non-verbal” doesn’t mean “unvoiced”. Most of that non-verbal communication needs words, but the words are not the bulk of the message.
If you dispute that the 90% figure is true, or at least perfectly plausible, then get someone to select a section of dialogue from a movie you’ve never seen and ask them to read it to you in a monotone, with a half-second gap between each word while you listen with your eyes closed. That will remove most of the no-verbal message. I’ve been in groups where we have done this, and then watched the section of the movie the dialogue was taken from. It really does bring home the importance of non-verbal cues. If anything 90% is an underestimate IMO.
Consider, for example this dialogue in “Godfather”:
“We’ve known each other many years, but this is the first time you came to me for counsel, for help. I can’t remember the last time that you invited me to your house for a cup of coffee, even though my wife is godmother to your only child. But let’s be frank here: you never wanted my friendship. And uh, you were afraid to be in my debt.”
Ask someone watching just that scene and they tell you all sorts of things that aren’t conveyed in the words. They can tell that Don Corleone is annoyed, but controlled and businesslike. They can tell that he is thinking while he is doing this. They can tell you that he is kind of apathetic about all this. That is actually the main message of the dialogue.
Now, imagine someone reading exactly the same dialogue shouting and screaming, red in the face and pushing the other actor around the set while doing it. That is going to give a *completely *different message, one of anger, even though the words are exactly the same. Then imagine someone delivering the lines while sobbing, with bent shoulders. That is yet another message, one of grief at being deserted by a friend. Yet the words are exactly the same.
The actual words spoken really don’t tell us very much at all about what the speaker means, because the words just deliver facts. It’s a fact that “this is the first time you came to me for counsel”. It is a fact that “I can’t remember the last time that you invited me to your house for a cup of coffee”. That is the only message that the words can convey. Whether those facts make the speaker psychotically angry, apathetic, or despondent can *only *be deciphered from non-verbal cues.
Having considered this, would you consider it reasonable that 90% of the information conveyed by the above dialogue is non-verbal?
And that largely addresses the original question. No, it doesn’t vary much depending on language. People are people, and we all communicate mostoly non-verbally. The non-verbal cues change with language, but most of the message is non-verbal in any language.
90% seems like a lot. That would imply that if you were talking to someone who didn’t speak the same language, you could still understand 90% of what they meant. In the Godfather example, there is a lot of information about the culture, history and expectations in the relationship that is independent of the emotion.
For the OP, there are people that I sometimes converse with in sign language, and sometimes in English. I see facial expressions from them when they are signing that they do not use when they are speaking. I think that facial expression in sign language is not always non-verbal, but I don’t know if that’s generally accepted.
I only use 10 percent of my brain to read the 90 percent of your non-verbal communication.
Blake’s thought experiment seems [arbitrary] percent lacking. Why restrict it to a steadily paced monotone? Aren’t inflection, cadence, tone, etc. verbal?
Not that there aren’t a lot of non-verbal cues out there, but I reject the idea that blind people are missing out on 90 percent of what’s being told to them or that phone conversations are that devoid of communication. I’m sure it’s easy to construct scenarios where non-verbal communication outweighs the verbal, but even with the broader nuance from Duckster’s link/percentage breakdowns (which are only applicable when “a communicator is talking about their feelings or attitudes”), I find it implausible that vocalizations carry so little information.
Quoting Duckster’s link again for emphasis (mine):
Are you people actually reading what is being posted?
If you shared their non-verbal language (that is, if you’d grown up in the same culture, in a functional family that shared that non-verbal language) then yes, you probably could. I’ve found it surprisingly easy to communicate with Deaf people, even though I understand only about 6 signs in ASL. Both of us being Americans, we can share a whole lot if we use simply the non-verbals of SAE, instead.
If you didn’t share a common non-verbal code, then you’re probably right. I don’t think I understand nearly as much of what a Spain born Spanish speaker is telling me as I do an American born mute person, even though I know more Spanish than I know ASL.
Blake’s absolutely right. Yes, inflection, pauses, grimaces, pacing, tone et al are a huge part of non-verbal communication. (I don’t know if it’s 90%, but it’s huge). It’s a common Theater 101 exercise to go around the class having everyone say “I love you” in a different way. I’ve performed two dozen distinct versions of “I love you” in 2 minutes. Actors love this stuff.
Reading the link debunks the basic assertion. It’s not 90% of communication is non-verbal, just when talking about your feelings and emotional attitude about something.
From the link
As a minimum you must state that the formula applies to communications of feelings and attitudes
Mehrabian did not intend the statistic to be used or applied freely to all communications and meaning.
So no, 90% of communication is not non-verbal. It is claimed that emotionally charged speech is.
Not to mention email/chat/text messages/forums.
Wow, this message board is running at only 10% efficiency, and we still manage to talk to one another! Sometimes we even exchange information*.
*Not valid in Great Debates.
No. verbal communication consists of words comprising a spoken language. Inflection and cadence are paralinguistic, which is to say, not what is meant by “verbal” although they contribute to meaning. They are a feature of language but not unique to speech. That is why we call it “Non verbal communication.” It does not use words to communicate meaning. it uses something else. Like pacing, inflection, facial expression.
Consider that American Sign Language also uses cadence and facial expression, to convey meaning, yet it uses no verbal words at all. It is an entirely non-verbal language.
Okay, then we’re relegating it to a term of art that is devoid of meaning outside a specialized sphere, which in turn makes the OP’s factoid hinge on an arbitrary and technical definition. It also suggests that the answer to the OP’s question “does this number change based on what language the sender is using?” is yes. Mandarin Chinese, is very similar to ASL; it’s mostly a non-verbal language.
Which is exactly what the first post response to the OP said: that nonverbal communication is largely cultural. People with culture-in-common can understand each other even if they don’t speak the same language, sometimes moreso than people-without-culture-in-common who do speak the same langauge.
Also, pardon me if I’m wrong, but tone is an aspect of every word in Chinese, right? Different tone, different definition? Not just the difference between emotional mode – I love that! (sincere) vs. I love that! (sarcastic). Then it seems to me Chinese is not mainly nonverbal. The tone is a part of the verbal word. In fact, it may be that Chinese is LESS nonverbal than other languages that use tone paralinguistically. That’s a guess.
I think they missed the nonverbal cues. 
Strictly speaking, “verbal” means consisting of or related to words (not just spoken words). So for example ASL is verbal, just not oral.
And yes I know people often use “verbal” to mean “oral”, but I don’t like it so there.