本文從Rodney Needham觀察到的跨文化發現開始：儀式的轉換往往伴隨著敲打的喧雜聲。亦即，喧雜為儀式創設框架，標示出它與日常生活的分隔。本文進而對比儀式如何運用喧雜（不可詮釋的聲音）與寂靜（不可詮釋的無聲）。其中一個例子比較五旬節派的方言與貴格教派的靜默，另一個聚焦於一九七零年代台灣農村的葬禮。在這兩個例子中，寂靜與喧雜在提供人們得以詮釋的空間上有著顯著的不同，但兩者都創造出儀式的節奏，也就是社會生活的節奏。然而，兩者運作的方式並不相同。若喧雜如同Needham所說創造出框架，寂靜則破除了框架。此外，寂靜脆弱而容易被打破，喧雜則能輕易吸收一切的干擾。這也就是為何儀式場域中寂靜如此罕有。

This essay begins from Rodney Needham’s observation of a cross-cultural pattern where percussive noise tends to accompany moments of ritual transition. Noise, that is, creates a frame around ritual, marking it off as something separate from ordinary life. I go on to contrast ritual uses of noise (uninterpretable sound) and silence (uninterpretable quiet). One example is a comparison of Pentecostal glossolalia and Quaker silence, and a second focuses on rural Taiwanese funerals in the 1970s. In both cases, silence and noise differ significantly in how much space they offer people for interpretation, but both help to create the rhythms of ritual and thus of social life. They do not, however, work in the same ways. If noise creates the frame, as Needham argued, silence often breaks through frames. However, silence is also fragile and easily broken, while noise can simply absorb interruptions. That is why silences are quite rare in ritual contexts.