Why translate marketing materials – one language does not rule them all

 

[ring*]

It seems so straightforward. Prepare top notch marketing material in English. Given that English is spoken at one level or another by some 1.5 billion people worldwide and is effectively the lingua franca of the world at this time, it should be cost-effective.  In practice, that approach is as relevant as “one size fits all”. While it is true that much of the world can somehow express themselves orally in English, far fewer can read effectively in English. Many non-native readers even avoid reading complicated materials in their second language as they find themselves spending more time and energy with less effective results when trying to decipher them. Visual elements, such as different letters and direction, significantly increase that difficulty. Thus, if a person or company wishes to reach a target audience, it is significantly more effective to prepare marketing material in the native language of their customers.

Ranking languages by native language readers leads to rather different result than that for speaking, native or non-native. The most dominant languages, at least in terms of numbers, are limited to a few countries. For example, Russian and Chinese are almost entirely spoken and read in the Russian Federation and China, respectively, while English as a native language is limited to a handful of countries, primarily the UK, the United States, South Africa, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. Even in those countries, a meaningful part of the country does not read English fluently whether because they are immigrants, children of immigrants or live in areas where another language is dominant. This phenomenon is not limited to the English-speaking countries as immigrants have reached every country on the globe, including Scandinavia and Germany, or multiple local languages coexist, as in many parts of Africa and India. Even the same language can have significant different local versions, as it the case of Spanish and Arabic. Therefore, the number of native language readers in English or any other language is significantly less than speakers, first or second language.

This distinction is meaningful to businesses because non-native readers are much less effective in grasping written text. First, they read slower to one degree or another as even fluent speakers of foreign languages have experienced. Second, scanning in a second language requires much more effort with less success. Of great importance is the fact that Internet users scan much more quickly in their native language than in their second language regardless of their familiarity with the latter. A difference in letters and/or direction(Hebrew/Arabic vs English/Spanish) further encumbers the scanning process. Furthermore, non-native speakers often miss direct or indirect messages due to a lack of familiarity with the nuances and cultural references. Psychologically, it is often so much effort to read a (relatively) long text in a foreign language that even high-level  foreign speakers prefer to avoid such texts. That second-language learners may be able to read that language does not necessarily mean that they can efficiently and effectively understand it or even choose to.

As a personal example, my native language is English but I am quite fluent in both French and Hebrew. During my recent trip to France, I found plowing through the French sites slower and “heavier” than if they had been English. As for Hebrew, a language that I live in and use every day, including translate from, I am quite slow in skimming websites,  not to mention longer texts, and dread receiving long emails in Hebrew as I know that I will have truly concentrate. For that reason, I don’t read Hebrew books for the pleasure before I go to bed, preferring English or French. In practice, notwithstanding my oral ability, my reading in my second languages is less effective and requires more effort.

For a business or individual desiring to reach a certain customer, it is important for the written material to be in the most transparent form, one in which the language of choice does not interfere with the message. If the readers are expending significant energy on trying to decipher the language, it is at the expense of considering the product or service. Yes, their English may be sufficient to basically understand the content but they are probably not going to act on it as there is little mental energy left for the effort even if they read to the end. Thus, translation is not “extra” expense but an essential marketing tool.

Today, it is quite tempting to use machine translation, whether a “Google Translate” tool of some kind or a ChatGPT result, to save money and achieve a seemingly acceptable result. Some 20 years of machine translation have left behind a long trail of failed and even embarrassing marketing efforts, even by large companies, that tried to save money and made themselves into a laughing stock, not the desired result. It is far more cost-effective to pay a human being a proper amount to a proper job. The increased sales almost always surpass the expense and create a positive company image, the purposes of marketing. As my father said, anything worth doing is worth doing well.

In summary, when conducting a marketing campaign, identity the native reading language of your customer and have a human professional translate the written texts. When it comes to making your written marketing material effective, no language, not even English, comes close to ruling them all.

* Picture captions help the blind fully access the Internet.

Picture credit

Accent grave

 

[Chat cartoon*]

Non-natives are often poor speakers of a language for the basic reason that they don’t try to speak and learn like children do – trial and error. While children have little pride and are willing to be laughed at or with, they quickly forget their embarrassment, understand their mistake and master the language, sometimes better than their parents. By contrast, most adults feel ashamed when struggling to express themselves in a second language and avoid the learning process. Aside from grammar and vocabulary errors, foreigners often fear people’s reaction to their accent.  Interestingly enough, this accent is generally not an issue for listeners. In reality, pronunciation and intonation can be a greater problem but fortunately can be consciously improved with practice.

Many foreign speakers hate the sound of their own accent in a foreign language. They can easily detect the difference between their accent and that of native speakers, whether live ones or those on television. As a result, they feel second-class or worse. Curiously, in many cases, a foreign accent actually creates a favorable impression. Henry Kissinger, he legendary Secretary of State under Nixon, retained his heavy German accent and caused people to believe that he was quite perspicacious, a benefit in his role. My mother was born in France and did not study English due to the “War”. She arrived in New York in her 20’s and quickly became a top perfume salesperson because people believed that, being French, she must be familiar with perfume. Even ordinary folk seem much more exotic when speaking with a foreign accent. How many actresses were considered sexy merely because they spoke in a different way? Thus, it is perfectly fine, even beneficial sometimes, to speak with an accent, even a heavy one.

On the other hand, native speakers do not understand the difficulty faced by foreigners in pronouncing the problem sounds posed by each language. Some examples include the throated h and a in Hebrew and Arabic, the various varieties of r in Russian, English, French and Spanish among others, the English th, so dreaded by the French, and the two types of sh in Russian. Every language has its landmines that test the tongue of the foreigner. Having learned to say these sounds as small children, locals see their pronunciation as obvious and view their mangling as laziness or lack of caring, which it is admittedly sometimes true. Fortunately, it is possible to practice these sounds in the safety of your own home, alone or with a trusted accomplice, and perfect their pronunciation. My challenging French r word was serrurière, a female locksmith, which truly gets your r’s rolling. Once you can say them like the native, your status will increase enormously as will their appreciation of your language skill and knowledge. It is all of matter of practice and therefore attainable.

A more difficult challenge is intonation. In simple terms, each language has a unique song, ranging from flat to sing-song or even extreme highs and lows. Russian tends to be flat, dying in the end while French is up and down and Italian and Hebrew simply sing. This is one of the reasons that speakers of certain languages are considered to be hysterical while other are viewed as cold. Simply, the natural rise and fall of volume varies by language and depends on the emotional content of the sentences. Small children naturally absorb the accepted intonation, but adults find it hard to change their way of speaking. Yet, incorrect intonation makes it difficult for natives to understand you and even sometimes conveys the wrong message, such as unintended annoyance, anger or questioning. As in pronunciation, a little homework goes a long way into retraining your speech to be flatter or more expressive. Over time, a person can develop linguistic schizophrenia, speaking in a different intonation for each language. In other cases, the learned intonation starts entering the native intonation, creating a hybrid. In any case, even not so young adults can practice and reduce native-language interference in their intonation, thus increasing the perception of their language skill, a good result in itself, as well as ensuring that their intended meaning is transmitted. As the song goes, you got the power.

So, if mastering a foreign language is a matter of practice and the willingness to make and learn from errors, accent should not be a barrier. Proper pronunciation and intonation can and should be learned, without public embarrassment. It is such a wonderful feeling when a local tells you how well you speak the language. Enjoy. You have earned the compliment.

* Picture captions allow access to the sighted impaired.

Picture credit: Image by <a href="https://pixabay.com/users/clker-free-vector-images-3736/?utm_source=link-attribution&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=image&amp;utm_content=23713">Clker-Free-Vector-Images</a> from <a href="https://pixabay.com/?utm_source=link-attribution&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=image&amp;utm_content=23713">Pixabay</a>

Foreign tube watching

I admit that I enjoy watching foreign television. The reason is not that it has better or different programs than my local one.  In fact, the format of most television shows worldwide is fairly similar both due to the universality of human nature and tendency to copycat successful programs and of equally poor quality. For that matter, I don’t even have to fully understand the language to enjoy the television as any child can tell you. In my countries, I could guess, often successfully, the meaning of many words.  For example, Russian is very helpful in understanding Polish while Italian is a cousin of Spanish. By contrast, in China, I understood absolutely nothing and was mesmerized by the tube.

First of all, I enjoy the tone of the speech, which reflects the nature of the language and people as well as the agenda of the television stations. For example, most characters in English tend to speak quietly and even respectfully. At the same time, they often are mocking the same institutions and customs they are respecting.  This is a nice contrast to the argumentative and loud nature of Israeli television. Chinese television is owned by the government and is therefore very nationalistic and proud. Aside from great military victories and impressive scientific and economic achievements, they also proudly present many shots of Chinese food production and preparation, always in a loud fashion (to my ears).  Thus, I was able to see parts of China that I would and will never visit in person. Not having lived in the United States for some 30 years now, the TV in the United States is interesting in terms of how the language and emphasis has changed. I can see by the words and message that America is much more critical and direct than it used to be.

The national differences are also reflected in the local version of internationalized programs.  The French version of Master Chef focuses on the artistry of the food while the Israeli program focuses on the past and present personal situation of the participants. The tone of the original Japanese Iron Chef is straight out of the classic Samurai Movies while the American one resembled sports broadcasting. In the Israeli The Voice, exotic is expressed by an ultra-orthodox singing rock while in China strangeness was represented by a black Chinese-African singing Frank Sinatra in English (and singing it well, it should be noted). I would not say “lost in translation” but instead “localized in translation”.

Finally, the aspect of foreign television I enjoy most is the commercials. Ads reflect the 

concerns and psychology of the people.  For example, based on the frequency of the ads on UK television, the Baby Boom generation is very concerned about paying for funerals while those in their twenties are having a hard time getting accepted for a credit card. French commercials focus on food, health and losing weight, no surprise. Apparently, death and credit are of no concern. Americans appear to be hypochondriac as every third commercial (or so) sells some drug, faithfully and rapidly reading through the long list of potential side effects and ultimately encouraging people to consult their doctor, of course.

So, while I am not a big fan of spending much time in hotel rooms when I travel, circumstances sometime lead to dead time, which I profit from by watching TV. I am amused, surprised, educated and even entertained by programs whose words I barely or do not understand at all as I learn about the culture, psychology and concerns of that place. In short, foreign television is much more interesting and educational than my local local one, just like the proverbial lawn.

Sweet nothing in name

Cotton candy, that spindly confection of sugar first marketed in 1904, is loved by children (and many adults) worldwide. Originally created in the United States, it has become a part of the entertainment culture of many countries.  As for all foreign products, the challenge has been to find a name for it in the local language.  The process is interesting as the chosen focus in the nomenclature varies.

The original American product was invented in partnership by a candy confectioner and a dentist.  Apparently, even though you are paranoid, conspiracies do really exist. In referring to their new product, they emphasized its most positive trait, sweetness.  It was called cotton candy. The Japanese literarily translated the word, calling it wata ame. Curiously, the Swahili word for it, pampa pipi, also refers to it as a sweet or candy.

However, its dominant feature in its translation is its texture.  The British called it candy floss, which became fairy floss in Australia, emphasizing its thin strings. Others grabbed on its overall texture, referring to its sweet cotton wool, including in Russian, сладкая вата [sladkaya vata], Hebrew, צֶמֶר גֶּפֶן מָתוֹק [tzemer gefen matok], Italian, zucchero filato, and Spanish, algodón de azúcar, literally cotton of sugar.

Yet, a third route exists.  As cotton candy is light and airy, some cultures relate it to hair.  The French call it la barbe à papa, evoking the images of a grandfather’s beard. Similarly, the Arabic term, shaear albanat, literally meaning “girl’s hair”.

Regardless, all agree that cotton candy is sweet and airy.  All that remains open to debate, at least according to the Pittsburgh Pirates announcer Bob Walk, is which color is the real one, blue or pink. Personally, as Rhett Butler so ceremoniously declared in Gone With the Wind,I don’t give a damn as it is way too sweet for me, whatever hue it has been given. Most people, especially children, would disagree with me and rightly so.  Life needs more sweet nothings.

Divinely great but confusing

A few days ago, as I was driving along the main road to Acco and passing a neighboring Arab village, I noticed a message painted on the exterior of a house in clear white English letters: God is great.  My initial reaction was not theological but linguistic.  In other words, I wondered which God the houseowner meant.

To explain, if the letters had been in Arabic and read Allah Akbar, I would have known the sign was referring to the Moslem God. Likewise, the sign saying Dieu est grand in France would be referring to the Catholic God although the same sign in Algeria would probably refer to Allah. However, back to our allah akbar, in Iraq, it is not clear whether the Shiite or Sunni master is the subject of the sign.

For that matter, a German Gott ist groß is no less ambivalent as Germany is historically a mixture of Protestant and Catholic provinces. By contrasts, in the American south, that sign in English would most probably refer to the Baptist or other Protestant diety. Likewise, in Spain or South America, Dios es grande is directed at the Catholic commander-in-chief.

The Hebrew version possesses another question.  While there is no dispute among Jews about the identity of the Chief Engineer (we focus our disputes on what exactly he wants us to do), the expression Elohim Gadol has two twists. For some, it imbibes the omnipotence of God.  However, the term is also used in slang to express a complete lack of control.  For example, if asked whether the contractor will finish the job on time, someone could answer Elohim gadol, the English equivalent being God knows.

So, upon seeing that sign, I responded in a typical Israel way: Yes, but.  That is I did not formally disagree but immediately complicated the issue.  Theology can be so confusing.

Language Inequality or the Joy of Challenges - Part 2

As was explained in the previous post, each language poses a different level of challenge to those who wish to learn it, depending on various factors.

4. Syntax. Linguist theorist claim that human brains are wired into in the subject-verb-object structure, meaning that people instinctively expect and understand that order.   Whether this is true or not, languages not bound by this order, i.e. those that use the case system require more energy to learn and understand but are much freer in terms of sentence construction.  A comparison of English and Russian demonstrates this point.  While English may have many words to learn, once the learner recognizes that a given word is a noun, it requires no more effort to process and apply that word.  The writer/speaker can place that noun in that form in any place where that word as a noun can enter.  For example, the form of the word shelf is the same in the following sentences: The shelf is not straight; Line up the shelf; The bottle is on the shelf. The caveat is that the order of words is vital importance and follows strict rules.  You cannot randomly mix up them up without changing the meaning.  By contrast, Russian, like other case-languages, places various suffixes to nouns depending on its function in the sentence or what the word before it. The meaning of all this complexity is that learners of the Russian language do not have the tools to understand or write a proper Russian sentence until they learn all six cases (which is still easier to do than the 19 cases of Finnish).  So, students of Russian earn their rewards.  On the other hand, once this skill is attained, it is hard to make an error in sentence construction since almost anything is allowed.

5. Roots. The rule in regards to learning a language is that the fewer roots there are, the easier the language. In other words, you get more miles (kilometers) for every word you learn.  So, Hebrew, a non-developing language for so long, is extremely easy to learn in that perspective while English is simply hell.  The other issue with roots is familiarity. To a certain point, being familiar with the roots from another language eases the process radically. English speakers generally do not struggle with Spanish because many of the words sound familiar.  It can happen that too much familiarity brings confusion.  I studied Italian for several years.  I had to remember the spelling differences between it and French, a more familiar language for me.  For example, the word and is et in French but e in Italian.  The same issue might arise among speakers of Slavic languages, among others.  It always helps to have some knowledge in advance.

6. Intonation and tone. All languages have intonations, the manner in which various kinds of sentences are spoken, i.e. statement, question, exclamation, etc.  This voice control varies from language to language and country to country and presents the greatest challenge to mastering a language since it requires conscious retraining of your voice.  For example, English has limited up/down waves when making a statement: I bought a car.  There is almost no difference in tone between the first and last word.  In Russian, with the equivalent sentence, the first word would have a normal tone but the volume would decrease until the last word almost disappears.  French, by contrast, will resemble a sine wave pattern, up and down.  In Italian, well, it would like an opera, to my ear at least.  However, a far greater learning challenge is tone-based languages, such as Chinese.  The same sound can have numerous meanings, all depending on the tone of the pronunciation. Small children pick up those tones quickly but most adults struggle to master them.

So, it should be clear that no language is a piece of cake in all aspects nor is any language impossible to learn.  Natural talent can be factor but motivation, time and effort can overcome any difficulty a language can pose.  Every language opens the world and its people.  This investment is clearly worthwhile. 

Necessity is the step-mother of (language) invention

In his blog on tennis players and language proficiency, http://www.jeromejerome.fr/en/Blog/tennis-and-languages, Jérôme Osselaer cited Novak Djokovic in regards to the reasons for his knowing so many languages as saying that he understood that Serbian is a minor language.  This polyglot was in strong contrast with most other players, who only know their own native tongue.  This comparison begs the question of why certain people learn many languages.

Let’s start with the assumption that, aside from some “weirdos” who like learning another tongue for its own sake, most people learn what they need to learn, i.e. necessity is the main motivation for actually learning something.  In support of this hypothesis, go to a country speaking an exotic language, such as Iceland, Finland, and Israel, the level of English in the street is quite good.  The average person is rather proficient in conducting a standard conversion in at least one foreign language, albeit with a strong accent and occasionally faulty grammar.  The example of German is interesting since English is highly emphasized in Germany, with even some job interviews being conducted in English.  This tendency may be explained by the fact that, outside of Austria and parts of Switzerland, German is not the first language in any other country as well as the bad connotation the German language had/has with the older generation. In Switzerland, the home of another polyglot tennis player, Rodger Federer, it is quite useful to speak at least three languages given the linguistic diversity of this physically small country.  On the same level, Spanish proficiency is required in many jobs in the US states adjoining the Mexican border, encouraging a wide knowledge of that language.

By contrast, visit a medium sized city in any of the countries speaking a prevalent first language such as English, Spanish or French, the difference between studying and knowing is striking.  Most people cannot give directions in a foreign language.  Of course, the reasons for this ignorance vary.  In some cases, such as in much of the United States, the assumption is that everybody knows English.  Therefore, learning a foreign language is superfluous.  In poor countries, most of the population does not have the income to travel abroad, in fact rendering a foreign language superfluous for travel but not business purposes.  Some countries have extremely poor education systems, such as France, increasing the gap between learning and using.  Finally, some countries have been politically isolated, with active discouragement of foreign languages, as is the case of parts of Eastern Europe.  In Budapest, the capital city of Hungary, relatively few people over the age of 40 understand English (or choose not to understand Russian).  In these places, the mother tongue is considered all that is necessary.

Younger computer users quite interestingly may have a solid reading knowledge of English due to the latter’s status as the lingua franca of the Internet. It is unclear how this comprehension translated into speaking ability. Yet, it is clear that the need to understand English strongly motivates this group to learn English, even in a non-systematic manner.

So, imploring people to learn a foreign language is not very effective.  Linking the world, physically or virtually, seems to provide the “reality” they need to actually go out and learn it.

On (corporate) mothers and daughters

Business language has its peculiarities, including expressions that only make sense to those who use it daily.  One interesting example is the description of that slave-like relation between the controlling company and the controlled company, .i.e. when one company owns 100% of another company.  Curiously, there seems to be slight but meaningful differences between languages on how to describe this relationship.

English refers to the company owning the shares as the parent company, reflecting the fact that non-animate nouns do not have a gender in English.  By contrast, since the word for company is feminine in Hebrew and French, the parental relationship is expressed through the mother with a small difference, i.e. חברת אם [hevrat em], mother company, in Hebrew and maison mère, mother house, in French.  Spanish assumes the blood connection and  emphasizes the main point, the power, using  empreza matriz, meaning master or founding company, derived from the word for womb. Russian, for some unknown reason, opts to express all the options, i.e. компания-учредитель [kompaniya uchhyeditel], компания владеющая [kompaniya vladtyushaya], материнская компания [materinskaya kompaniya], and родительская компания [roditelskakya kompaniya], meaning founding, leading, mother, and parental company, respectively.

On the other side of the coin, English refers to the owned company as a subsidiary, from the Latin subsidiarius meaning help or support.  Spanish follows this lead, referring to such a company as a subsidiara. Keeping with the parental connection, Russians and Israeli treat their subsidiaries as daughers, using the terms дочерная компания [doshernaya firma] and חברת בת  [hevrat bat], respectively.  The French call it a filiale, which is linked to the Latin word for son, but generally refers to children in general. 

If Turgenev about physical fathers and sons, who will write a book about mothers and daughters of the legal body variety?

Telling Boys and Girls Apart

In most languages, not including English, nouns have a gender, i.e. masculine, feminine, and sometime neutral.  The requirement to have adjectives agree with their nouns requires the speaker or writer to quickly identify the gender of the noun.  In speaking, a person can guess or fudge the sound.   This is not true in writing.  Alas, some languages are more user friendly than others.

Italian makes life the easiest.  If the noun ends in o, it is masculine; if in a, it is feminine.  So, Italians say uno bello carro but una bella casa.  If the ends in an e, it can vary.  You have to memorize those.  So, uno fabricante is masculine while una delusion is feminine.  All, it is not too difficult for the learner, as is typical for Italian in general.

French is a different story.  I personally have spent hours checking and rechecking the gender of nouns.  The only rule that seems to stay in my head is that nouns ending in ion and é are feminine.  To see the problem, look at this site: http://www.languageguide.org/french/grammar/gender/rule.html.  It reinforces my sense that the rules are only indications of probability.  A learner either has to have a good ear and memory and do what I do, check it in the dictionary.  La vie est dure sans confiture.

Hebrew is not too bad.  If a nouns ends in a consonant except for ת  (tov) or ה (heh), it is masculine, with only a few exceptions.  So,  כותבת(kotevet – address) is feminine while מכתב (miktav – letter) is masculine.   Hebrew is an easy language to learn in this sense.

By contrast, Russian is a challenge. It adds a third gender, neutral.  Moreover, whatever rules exist are more than equally matched by the exceptions.  The indications on this site, http://masterrussian.com/nounsandcases/gender_and_number.htm, are a bit misleading.  A comprehensive Russian grammar book can provide a rather long list of exceptions to every rule.  Sometimes I wonder if native Russian speakers get it right all the time.

Clearly, English is the easiest – there are no noun genders.  There are few feminine forms of professions – stewardess, waitress, and actress, to name a few.  However, those are fairly obvious.

So, not languages are equally kind to their learners.  Just having long hair and an a at the end of the word may not be enough to say whether it is a girl.

These are a few of my favorite things

As a connoisseur of linguistic delights, I have learned to appreciate the unique ways each language approaches communication, often wishing that the “trick” could be copied to other languages.

Here is a partial list of my personal language favorites:

French – The word si expressing disagreement to a negative statement:  “You don’t want another piece of cake” “Si”, i.e. yes I do.

Russian: the pronoun свой [svoi], which refers to the person in the subject: I, you, s/he, we:, they see свой face.

Spanish: the upside down question mark at the beginning of a question: ¿You understand?

Hebrew: The intense use of roots, making learning new vocabulary much easier: write, dictate, address, letter, correspond all have the same root, כתב [katav].

English: the lack of agreement in gender and number between adjectives and nouns, massively reducing the chances of error in making sentences, as large hand(s), not large(s) hand(s).

Italian: The natural sing-song rhyme of the language that leaves you no option but to smile: Io amo parlare italiano tutto il giorno.

Alas, nothing is perfect; here are a few aspects of these languages I am less fond of, namely:

French: the lack of firm rules to know whether a noun is masculine or feminine, which has caused me to spend a lot of time checking dictionaries.

Russian: the awful tendency of Russian to have one page of exceptions for every page of rules; believe me on this point.

Spanish: the subjunctive mode will quickly change your opinion that Spanish is an easy language to learn.

Hebrew: the binyanim or verb groups have always defied my understanding; call this a personal taste.

English: The spelling system, based on a wide base of extremely varied pronunciation patterns, is beyond logic.

Italian: Listening to Italian, how can you take the message seriously?

So, while I am also fond of raindrops, whiskers, kettles, and mittens, those are also a few of my favorite things.