non-verbal cue

The word 'indicated' implies a definitive, almost undeniable signal. Non-verbal cues, however, are often subtle and open to interpretation. Using 'suggested' acknowledges this inherent ambiguity. Japanese speakers, striving for clarity and directness in communication (a trait sometimes valued in Japanese culture), might inadvertently choose 'indicated' believing it strengthens their message. However, in English, especially when discussing nuanced communication like non-verbal cues, a less assertive verb is more appropriate to reflect the subjective nature of interpretation. The nuance is about hedging and avoiding overstatement, which is often more valued in English discourse than directness.

The phrase 'direct translation' suggests a one-to-one mapping between inner feelings and outward expressions, which is rarely the case. Non-verbal cues are often subconscious and complex. The verb 'betrayed' better captures the idea that these cues unintentionally revealed his true feelings, perhaps against his conscious effort to conceal them. Japanese speakers might opt for 'direct translation' because they are trying to express a clear and unambiguous connection. However, English often favors expressions that acknowledge the complexities and contradictions of human behavior. Also, 'betray' has a dramatic flair that is often suitable for describing internal conflict made visible. The concept of 'honne' (true feelings) and 'tatemae' (public facade) in Japanese culture may also lead to the misunderstanding that non-verbal cues are always a direct reflection of 'honne', when in reality, they can be just as carefully managed as verbal communication.

While 'interesting' is not grammatically incorrect, it lacks the analytical depth expected when discussing communication in a professional or academic context. 'Revealing' implies that the non-verbal cues provided insights or information, making it a more appropriate descriptor. Japanese speakers might choose 'interesting' as a safe and neutral term, avoiding potentially judgmental or critical language. However, in English, particularly when analyzing behavior, more descriptive and evaluative language is often expected. The difference highlights a cultural tendency for Japanese speakers to prioritize harmony and avoid direct evaluation, while English speakers in analytical settings often favor more explicit and insightful observations. The word 'interesting' can also sound dismissive in many contexts, especially when more insightful observation is expected.