The man had a * with the locals.

Is there a word that means "close interaction with someone"? I am not thinking about intimate or sexual interactions, but close interactions in general, which include intimate interactions. I can think of the adjective "warm", but it's not specific enough, and I don't want to necessarily imply that all interactions are positive like the adjective warm does. A word or an adjective that basically corresponds to the idea.

  • Could you please clarify what you mean by close, if it includes "intimate" but also includes intereations that are not intimate? Could you give an example or two of the kind of interaction that you have in mind? Off hand, i can't think of a specific term that exactly covers what i take to be your meaning here. Commented Mar 19, 2019 at 17:25
  • "The man was on good/friendly terms with the locals" OR "The man was getting along well with the locals" Commented Mar 19, 2019 at 17:52

3 Answers 3


How about rapport ?

: a friendly, harmonious relationship

especially : a relationship characterized by agreement, mutual understanding, or empathy that makes communication possible or easy

  • a "rapport" is a relationship, but not an interaction. Commented Mar 19, 2019 at 17:23
  • @DavidSiegel true, but I can't think of a word that specifically means "a close interaction". Actually, I am not even sure what "a close interaction" means, and hopefully the OP will answer your question with some specific examples.
    – Mixolydian
    Commented Mar 19, 2019 at 17:29
  • 1
    @DavidSiegel I don't see how it's possible to have a relationship without having some kind of interaction. Can you think of an example of a relationship that involves no interaction of any kind? (Even trade relationships involve economic interaction.) Or vice-versa. If you interact with someone or something, it puts you into a relationship of some kind (even if only temporarily). Commented Mar 20, 2019 at 17:50
  • @Jason Bassford When a relationship could be described as a rapport it would involve interactions, but that word describes the relationship, not the interactions. "Love" describes a relationship between people. Those people may have interactions which can be described as "sex" or other interactions. But that does not mean that 'love" describes those interactions. There are one-way relationships that involve only one-way interactions., such as the one way relationship "is a fan of" or 'is influenced by". The relationship "is an ancestor of" might not involve any interactions. Commented Mar 20, 2019 at 18:22

I would use the adjective "private" which is the opposite of "public". That would include intimate and non intimate encounters. It corresponds nicely to "close" (proximity) and doesn't mean positive nor negative.

The man had a private talk with the locals.

In some cases you could also use one-on-one or eye-to-eye if it's only about two individuals

The man had a one-on-one discussion with his brother


If you want a noun, how about ‘familiarity,’ modified by the appropriate adjective (e.g. ‘slight familiarity,’ ‘basic familiarity,’ ‘thorough familiarity’)? Relationships within families are not always positive, consistent with the question.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .