Psychoanalytic therapy has been known as the ‘talking cure’ for a long time, because it suggests that the cure mechanism is to bring the repressed unconscious ideas and affects into the conscious system by a series of therapeutic techniques (e.g., free association, dream interpretation, transference analysis and resistance analysis). During this process, verbal interpretation plays a key role, which leads language to be the dominant factor in psychoanalysis. Although Freud and some other analysts have noted nonverbal information, the discussion of it is relatively scattered and has not been attached importance. At the end of 20th century, the findings of cognitive neuroscience, dynamic systems theory and infant research deeply revealed these unconscious and nonverbal communication between different individuals. With the significant contributions of the Boston Change Process Study Group (BCPSG), Beebe and her colleagues, and some other researchers, the role of nonverbal communication in treatment has been an important theme in contemporary psychoanalytic field. The possibility of nonverbal communication can be elaborated from two perspectives. The one is phylogenetic perspective, which shows that animals in natural world can communicate with each other, although they can not use language. The other is ontogenetic perspective: a preverbal infant does not have the capacity to use language, but he can communicate with his caregiver by nonverbal behavior. Correspondingly, the caregiver’s response recorded by the infant is also nonverbal. In a word, the capacity to nonverbal communication is early than verbal communication. Furthermore, nonverbal exchange will not weaken or vanish in the individual’s development process; instead, it functions as the basis of language. Therefore, adults’ nonverbal communication can been regarded as a bridge between infant research and adult psychotherapy. The meaning of nonverbal communication for psychoanalytic therapy can be mainly discussed at two aspects. Firstly, it can provide an effective approach by which the analyst and the patient can know more about each other. The mental states of the patient and analyst can be reflected in their nonverbal behaviors; transference and countertransference (including body reaction, emotional state and dream) can also be a reflection of the interaction between the therapeutic alliance. Secondly, nonverbal interactions in treatment can effectively improve the patient’s mental and interpersonal problems. BCPSG proposed that the mechanism is to change the implicit relational knowing of the patient. During therapeutic process, the cooperation of the patient and analyst will build an intersubjective field, in which they share some subjective experiences. When a ‘moment of meeting’ happens, the analyst and patient can transcend their roles in treatment, open their minds, and construct a ‘real relationship.’ Then the intersubjective field and ‘shared implicit relationship’ will reorganize and change. At this crucial moment, nonverbal communication is more important than verbal communication, as the former functions more quickly and directly, and holds richer forms. It should be pointed out that the emphasis on nonverbal communication does not deny the role of verbal communication in treatment; instead, they can be complementary. Psychoanalytic research in the future should make a further discussion on nonverbal communication.