But, really, the script you're meant to follow goes like this:
Hey how are you?
Hey, good, how about you?
Pretty good
Edit: let’s also not forget that “howdy” is a shortened version of “how do you do”
It's even more peculiar/banal in French, where the conversation goes:
Salut, ça va?
Ça va, et toi?
Ça va.
It's as meaningless an exchange as most greetings (the only meaning being to actually acknowledge and greet the person), but it does mean something literally, and the exchange is technically more complete than when answering "How are you?" with "Hi".
That being said, you'll see someone answering "Salut, ça va?" with "Salut!" quite frequently as well. I would perhaps consider it slightly more of a misstep than in English, but only marginally so.
This isn’t a big distinction because I agree with both of you about the relative meaninglessness of the content of such a greeting in either language.
Because I definitely do that. I'd expect that to be a common idiom in any language. Somewhat surprised to read this exchange seeming to suggest otherwise.
The 'literal translation' would be translating word-by-word, which by definition isn't going to work for idioms:
> idiom > > A group of words established by usage > as having a meaning not deducible from > those of the individual words
Oxford Dictionary
"Ça va" translates literally to "it goes".
So the above exchange would literally translate to:
Hello, it goes?
It goes, and you?
It goes.
"Hey, doing well?" "Doing well, and you?" "Doing well."
Ca va?
Ca va ca va. Ca va?
Ca va.
- Re.
- Re.
Some people hate "Re".
If it's someone you know well or who knows you, in the timings of responses and the expression of the face you are able to pick up how they're feeling, if something is going on in their lives or is bothering them.
It's much less scripted than the American "hi, how are you", which can only have one answer and always need to have the same expression.
ack?
ack!
A: "'sup [man]?" B: "'sup?"
(It's also stated only has like a half-question or less—the usual question lilt is deemphasized.)
as in "You're looking well", "yeah, nah, been a bit crook lately"
"How are you?" "Not bad, yourself?" "Good, so I have this problem..."
"Hey, how was your weekend?" "Not bad actually, you?" "Yeah not bad"
I mean, you clearly have no interest in other person's life, so why have stupid, dull, pointless greetings like that?
It's not easy to translate but I think it's quite similar to the greetings mentioned above. Literally it's something like: Well? You? (and not 'well' in the sense of goodness, but rather questioning)
It's an interesting greeting and as a foreigner seemed very odd at first.
It's not that they don't notice, it's that "How are you" can be read as either a question or a greeting in modern English.
It's even more pronounced with other phrases. If you're introduced to three people and they respond "Hi", "Hello", "What's up?", it's understood that they're all pretty much saying the same thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phatic_expression
See also:
http://www.signosemio.com/jakobson/functions-of-language.asp
There's this sort of...meme, I suppose, of perfect dialogue. You can see it a lot in the way movie characters talk to each other, especially the ones who are supposed to be intellectual. Think of characters like Tyrion Lannister, Robert Ford, Chuck Rhoades or Andy Dufresne.
They're not just preternaturally witty - they have excellent rhetorical poise. They don't open conversations directly, they gracefully meander to their point with some kind of obscure arcana or quiet intensity. They're theatrical in their delivery and flush with metaphors, analogies or double entendres.
That's the way I feel about questions like, "Is your life a rich tapestry?" That's not a question that's asked or spoken, it's a question that's written. It's so pointed and so raw that, at best, you'd think the asker is eccentric. If you're less charitable you'd think they're simply socially awkward. Opening conversations that way is flying too close to the Sun.
I feel that the best way to answer that question is to turn away from the person asking, as if lost in thought. Then you'd make your way to your answer circuitously, by first deflecting to talk about the origin of the word "tapestry" itself alongside some powerful childhood memory about your father or a famous quote made on the eve of war. Finally, you'd arrive at a delightfully disarming answer that gives a real insight into your life and experience.
But in actuality I'd probably be asked that at a social gathering and respond with some sort of befuddled, "Er, what do you mean?" while being utterly taken aback at the penetrating intimacy of the question. Later on I'd probably ask someone, "Hey what's up with that guy, did he self-help book big on provocative conversation starters or something?"
If you really want to go down the route of non-traditional greetings, I'd recommend, "What have you been reading lately?" or "What are you about?" They still require some situational awareness, but they're a lot less risky and polarizing. I enjoyed being asked those when I first heard them.
It's a great question because if it draws out a rude response like yours, the questioner knows to not waste more time on small talk.
Would you really accept being asked my imaginary question about your spouses sex life from any ordinary aquaintence? Why not? It's free help! You should always want your spouse to have as full and rich a life as possible, and it's too easy to forget that a big part of their life is actually subject to your level of effort and imagination and bravery.
The original question is essentially personal on the order that we usually place on sexual or health matters.
The best word is "inconsiderate" in that it literally fails to consider, or considers and ignores, that many, perhaps most people's honest answer would have to be no, and further, the process of being asked and answering forces everyone who had to answer "no" or "not enough", to recognize that "no" isn't just a harmless answer like what flavor of ice cream you like, where chocolate or vanilla or "I don't like ice cream" are all equally fine. No they are forced to confront that "no" is a failing, and therefor that they fail at something, and that what they fail at is nothing too important, just life itself.
I know, right? I knew I couldn't be the only person around that gets annoyed when other ask this of me and I have to divert resources the answer the annoyingly irrelevant question.
even more so when after careful considering and answering, the answer is essentially ignored. every. time.
It’s protocol negotiation, volume adjustment, and preparation for transmission.
That is to say, when passing someone in a hall, I want to stick to "hi" or "good morning", and feel uncomfortable if the other person says "how are you?". If it's the start of a conversation, "How are you?" works absolutely fine.
I think the problem is that "How are you?" doesn't finish an exchange nicely. You can easily greet someone in passing with A: "Hi" B: "Hi" <EOL>
It doesn't work (for me, at least) to go A: "How are you?" B: "(Fine.) How are you?" A: (optional)"Fine"
If A responds fine, it feels almost rude to abrubtly finish a conversation that had previously involved both parties asking questions about each other (even though they're really just being used as greetings). If A doesn't respond at all, that's rude for not responding to a question!
And I, too, find the exchange irritating and have now taken to a stock response of "hi" as a form of "nonviolent resistance"[01] to the question!
The book "Quiet: The Power of Introverts" has an interesting message about how introverts struggle to fit into an image of society where one must be a quick-witted extrovert in order to be successful and powerful. I think it's the same for fast vs slow thinkers. It's important to know your a slow thinker, and accept it as a strength.