linguistic oddity
Jun. 20th, 2003 01:31 pmI was surprised to see the following logo today:

I had assumed that, in general, when translating a business name with semantic content from one language to another, you would actually translate into the target language, rather than transliterating the phonemes in the source rendering.
I mean, it's one thing if your name is, say, "McDonald's"; that's just a person's name without an obvious corresponding word, so you'd just transliterate it. But "Burger King" has semantics that are lost in (this) translation, which makes me wonder why they did that when they didn't have to.

I had assumed that, in general, when translating a business name with semantic content from one language to another, you would actually translate into the target language, rather than transliterating the phonemes in the source rendering.
I mean, it's one thing if your name is, say, "McDonald's"; that's just a person's name without an obvious corresponding word, so you'd just transliterate it. But "Burger King" has semantics that are lost in (this) translation, which makes me wonder why they did that when they didn't have to.
(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-20 11:02 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-20 11:07 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-20 11:14 am (UTC)My understanding is that their servicemark is "Burger King", not the local translation of it (whether literal or idiomatic), so they need to transliterate instead of translating.
(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-20 11:28 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-20 11:02 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-20 11:10 am (UTC)Thus far most cases of this sort of thing that I've seen have been either ones where there's no translation (place names, for example) or ones where only part of a phrase translates (e.g. "New York" -- sure, you can translate "new", but then you're stuck).
(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-20 11:15 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-20 11:19 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-20 11:31 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-20 11:33 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-20 02:00 pm (UTC)The Japanese are also the ones that name even native products in English and thn use the transliterations as the trade names...
Translations versus Transliterations
Date: 2003-06-20 11:43 am (UTC)Could you really see an accurate translation used for the name of most products? "Happily Endebted Corpse" or "Monarch of Ground Meat Patties" don't exactly scan from a marketing point of view... :)
Re: Translations versus Transliterations
Date: 2003-06-20 11:54 am (UTC)Re: Translations versus Transliterations
Date: 2003-06-20 11:59 am (UTC)Re: Translations versus Transliterations
Date: 2003-06-20 12:06 pm (UTC)"Bite the Wax Tadpole"
Date: 2003-06-20 12:20 pm (UTC)Re: "Bite the Wax Tadpole"
Date: 2003-06-20 12:59 pm (UTC)Thanks for the link. I'd heard both of these stories long before I ever heard of Snopes, and didn't think to go check later.
Re: "Bite the Wax Tadpole"
Date: 2003-06-20 10:40 pm (UTC)Re: "Bite the Wax Tadpole"
Date: 2003-06-21 09:51 am (UTC)Re: "Bite the Wax Tadpole"
Date: 2003-06-21 08:02 pm (UTC)An Israeli variation in that....
Date: 2003-06-22 02:54 am (UTC)[International] Brand Names in Hebrew are almost always transliterations, after all, from a marketing point of view, you want to keep the Brand Name recognition.
You don't know me. I was just passing through.
Re: An Israeli variation in that....
Date: 2003-06-22 10:47 am (UTC)You don't know me. I was just passing through.
Hi. Welcome.
(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-20 01:35 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-20 02:25 pm (UTC)Per the quote I alluded to, it's supposedly a "Royale" in France. In Brazil, IIRC, it was a "Quartero", which plays on the "quarter" sound but doesn't actually say one quarter of what.
(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-23 03:49 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-20 10:41 pm (UTC)