|
What's in a name?
In Hong Kong,
few people were surprised when Alfa Romeo had to withdraw its 164
model from the market. In Cantonese, '164' sounds like 'die all
the way'. Similarly, General Motors had to rename its successful
Nova model the Corsa for the continental European market on account
of unfortunate connotations in Spain ('Nova' means 'doesn't go'
in Spanish).
Our special feature looks at branding
across different languages and cultures. It is written by Pete Dewar,
a Naming Consultant, who works for Interbrand in London.
Disastrous naming
stories must haunt a select group of unfortunate brand managers.
Indeed, we all chuckle when such anecdotes are recalled. But we
should spare a thought for these poor folk who are faced with the
task of selecting names that are both inoffensive and do not arouse
derision around the world. How can they overcome such linguistic
hurdles and market their wares effectively across many different
languages and cultures?
|
How
can they overcome linguistic hurdles and market their wares
effectively across many different languages and cultures?
|
For a long time
it seemed the answer was to avoid the issue for product naming.
Different names could be used in different territories for the same
product. In this way nobody would be offended, and the names could
be tailored to address local audiences.
Times have moved
on, however. Nowadays, the growing trend towards global brands has
forced marketers to rethink their strategies for international product
naming. Unilever, for example, has finally brought the UK in line
with its global strategy, changing the name of its household-cleaning
product Jif to Cif. Although press coverage of this name change
reflected a somewhat baffled UK audience, it seems there was method
in Unilever's apparent madness. Their research showed Cif to be
easier to pronounce than Jif in a wide variety of languages. And
so it is that the UK has had to be shuffled into line with the rest
of the world, in spite of the fact that the new name no longer suggests
the benefits of the product in English - that cleaning can be done
'in a jif(fy)'.
That is not
to say, however, that the ideal name should mean something specific
in a particular language. In fact with the advent of globalised
products and companies, it is almost impossible to develop a name
with a specifically understood meaning in different languages. Abstract
names, which can be pronounced in the widest selection of languages,
can be invested with meaning through other communications such as
design, advertising and PR. They also have the benefit of being
more easily registered and protected as trademarks.
So how might
one go about developing such a name? One of the key considerations
is pronounceability in all the languages in which the name will
be used. There are certain morphological standards that can be used
to ensure a name can be pronounced in all languages. A simple syllable
structure, accepted by all languages of the world, is when every
syllable in a word comprises a consonant sound (C) followed by an
unbroken vowel sound (V). The following examples are taken from
a range of languages and international brand names to illustrate
this:
Ma-la-wi
CV-CV-CV
Bo-go-ta
CV-CV-CV
To-ri-no
CV-CV-CV
Ma-li-bu
CV-CV-CV
Co-ca-co-la
CV-CV-CV-CV
If the name
that is being created is intended to be truly international, then
following this simple rule will guarantee that people will be able
to pronounce the name comfortably in all territories in which it
is used, regardless of whether or not it actually means something
specific.
However, as
I mentioned earlier, no one wants a name to mean something awful
in a foreign language. Therefore one of the other key factors to
consider is linguistic acceptability in terms of potential meaning.
Checking a name with native speakers who live in the country where
the language is spoken is vital. Over time, trends in language usage
develop. Native speakers will be sensitive to any subtle shifts
in meaning of certain words that foreign linguists may not appreciate,
and can therefore flag up any potentially unfortunate connotations.
They can also indicate potentially inflammatory cultural associations
(I often wonder, for example, how the brand name Orange is perceived
in certain parts of Northern Ireland). In addition, native speakers
will be more familiar with local brands and can act as a litmus
test for any clashes or similarities with existing brands.
|
Checking
a name with native speakers who live in the country where
the language is spoken is vital
|
All the same,
some brands begin life in a particular country without concrete
plans to expand globally, and so a name is developed to suit the
local audience. After all, it is not always possible to plan ahead
and create a name that is universally linguistically acceptable.
It will be interesting to see how Orange goes on to roll out its
brand on a global basis. The name does not follow the basic linguistic
rule for pronounceability in all languages that I laid out above.
Will the name prove to be a stumbling block outside the English-speaking
world? In addition, the Orange 'brand language', like the name,
also works particularly well for the English audience ('The future's
bright, the future's Orange'), but will it be able to translate
its strongly identifiable tone abroad? Who knows, Orange may come
to represent something quite different world-wide that will then
feed back into the English understanding of the brand.
There are, of
course, certain success stories already surrounding global brands
with names obviously rooted in a particular language. McDonald's
has clearly successfully exported its name and food around the globe
to the extent that it has almost created a micro-language which,
although clearly based in English, is understood in many different
languages. John Travolta's character in the film Pulp Fiction famously
remarks that the Big Mac in France is known as Le Big Mac. And whilst
he recalls that the Quarter Pounder with Cheese is known as the
Royale with Cheese in order to take account of the metric system,
the name is still ostensibly in English rather than French. In fact,
even if certain products have slight local variants that relate
to particular languages and cultures, the linguistic format generally
remains the same, with the (Scottish) English prefix Mc.
Yet whilst this
formula has been a success for companies such as McDonald's, I think
more organisations need to reflect the geographical scope of their
brands through the names they develop. Can companies, particularly
those that are English-speaking, set aside the imperialist notion
that everybody can pronounce and understand English names, and be
willing to create truly international names? I think they can, indeed
they must, if they are going to succeed in a world where brands
need to communicate with both global and local markets.
Pete Dewar has
a degree in Modern Languages from Cambridge University and is a
Naming Consultant with Interbrand who lives and works in London.
For more information, please email Pete on peter.dewar@interbrand.com.
For
more information about branding in a global context, take a look
at www.brandchannel.com.
For more information on getting
the language advantage for competitive advantage, email us on info@languageadvantage.com
| previous
special features |
For
previous special features go to our
library archive of special
features.
|
