Studies have demonstrated frequent use of English in international advertising, but little is known about people’s preference for English versus local languages. This article empirically investigated the difficulty of the English language as a possible determinant of people’s preference for English or the local language. In an experiment, Dutch participants judged a number of car ads with English slogans that were pretested as easy or difficult to understand. They were subsequently asked to express a preference for either the English slogan or the Dutch equivalent. Results showed that easy-to-understand English slogans were appreciated better than difficult-to-understand English slogans. Moreover, the degree of difficulty in comprehension of the English slogans affected participants’ preference for English. English was preferred to Dutch when it was easy to understand; when it was difficult to understand, English was appreciated as much as the Dutch equivalent. In conclusion, the experiment provides empirical support for the role of comprehension in the preference for and appreciation of English in international advertising.
Agrawal, M. ( 1995). Review of a 40-year debate in international advertising: Practitioner and academician perspectives to the standardization/adaptation issue. International Marketing Review, 12, 26-48.
2.
Ahn, J., & La Ferle, C. ( 2008). Enhancing recall and recognition for brand names and body copy: A mixed-language approach. Journal of Advertising , 37, 107-117.
3.
Alm, C.O. ( 2003). English in the Ecuadorian commercial context. World Englishes, 22, 143-158.
4.
Bhatia, T.K. ( 1992). Discourse functions and pragmatics of mixing: Advertising across cultures. World Englishes, 11, 195-215.
5.
Bhatia, T.K. ( 2001). Language mixing in global advertising. In E. Thumboo (Ed.), The three circles of English: Language specialists talk about the English language (pp. 195-215). Singapore: UniPress.
6.
Brislin, R.W. ( 1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: Methodology (Vol. 2, pp. 389-444). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
7.
Charles, M. ( 2007). Language matters in global communication: Article based on ORA lecture, October 2006. Journal of Business Communication , 44, 260-282.
8.
De Groot, E.B. ( 2008). English annual reports in Europe: A study on the identification and reception of genre characteristics in multimodal annual reports originating in the Netherlands and in the United Kingdom. Utrecht: LOT.
9.
De Mooij, M. ( 2005). Global marketing and advertising: Understanding cultural paradoxes (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
Gerritsen, M., Korzilius, H., Van Meurs, F., & Gijsbers, I. ( 2000). English in Dutch commercials: Not understood and not appreciated. Journal of Advertising Research, 40, 17-31.
11.
Gerritsen, M., Nickerson, C., Van den Brandt, C., Crijns, R., Dominguez, N., Van Meurs, F., et al. (2007). English in print advertising in Germany, Spain and the Netherlands: Frequency of occurrence, comprehensibility and the effect on corporate image. In G. Garzone & C. Ilie (Eds.), The role of English in institutional and business settings: An intercultural perspective (pp. 79-98). Berlin: Peter Lang .
12.
Haarmann, H. ( 1989). Symbolic values of foreign language use: From the Japanese case to a general sociolinguistic perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
13.
Han, S.-P., & Shavitt, S. ( 1994). Persuasion and culture: Advertising appeals in individualistic and collectivistic societies. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 326-350.
14.
Hoeken, H., Van den Brandt, C., Crijns, R., Dominguez, N., Hendriks, B., Planken, B., et al. (2003). International advertising in Western Europe: Should differences in uncertainty avoidance be considered when advertising in Belgium, France, The Netherlands and Spain?Journal of Business Communication, 40, 195-218.
15.
Hofstede, G. ( 1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
16.
Hofstede, G. ( 2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .
17.
Hornikx, J., Van Meurs, F., & Starren, M. ( 2007). An empirical study on readers’ associations with multilingual advertising: The case of French, German, and Spanish in Dutch advertising. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development , 28, 204-219.
18.
Hornikx, J., & O’Keefe, D.J. (2009). Adapting consumer advertising appeals to cultural values: A meta-analytic review of effects on persuasiveness and ad liking. Communication Yearbook, 33, 38-71.
19.
Hornikx, J., & Starren, M. ( 2006). The relationship between the appreciation and the comprehension of French in Dutch advertisements. In R. Crijns , & C. Burgers (Eds.), Werbestrategien in Theorie und Praxis: Sprachliche Aspekte von deutschen und niederländischen Unternehmensdarstellungen und Werbekampagnen [Advertising strategies in theory and practice: Linguistic aspects of German and Dutch organizational representations and advertising campaigns] (pp. 129-145). Tostedt, Germany: Attikon.
20.
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21.
Jackson, S. ( 1992). Message effects research: Principles of design and analysis . New York: Guilford Press.
22.
Kankaanranta, A. ( 2006). "Hej Seppo, could you pls comment on this!"-Internal email communication in lingua franca English in a multinational company. Business Communication Quarterly, 69, 216-225.
23.
Kelly-Holmes, H. ( 2000). Bier, parfum, kaas: Language fetish inEuropean advertising. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 3, 67-82.
24.
Kelly-Holmes, H. ( 2005). Advertising as multilingual communication. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
25.
Krishna, A., & Ahluwalia, R. ( 2008). Language choice in advertising to bilinguals: Asymmetric effects for multinationals versus local firms. Journal of Consumer Research, 35, 692-705.
26.
Leininger, C. ( 1997). The alignment of global management strategies, international communication approaches, and individual rhetorical choices. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 11, 261-280.
27.
Louhiala-Salminen, L., Charles, M., & Kankaanranta, A. (2005). English as a lingua franca in Nordic corporate mergers. English for Specific Purposes , 24, 401-421.
28.
Piller, I. ( 2000). Multilingualism and the modes of TV advertising. In F. Ungerer (Ed.), English media texts past and present: Language and textual structure (pp. 263-279). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
29.
Piller, I. ( 2001). Identity constructions in multilingual advertising. Language in Society, 30, 153-186.
30.
Puntoni, S., De Langhe, B., & Van Osselaer, S.M.J. (2008). Bilingualism and the emotional intensity of advertising language. Journal of Consumer Research, 35, 1012-1025.
31.
Ray, N.M., Ryder, M.E., & Scott, S.V. ( 1991). Toward an understanding of the use of foreign words in print advertising. Journal of International Consumer Marketing , 3, 69-97.
32.
Shoham, A. ( 1996). Effectiveness of standardized and adapted television advertising: An international field study approach. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 9, 5-23.
33.
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. ( 1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
34.
Vandermeeren, S. ( 1999). English as a lingua franca in corporate writing. In F. Bargiela-Chiappini & C. Nickerson (Eds.), Writing business: Genres, media and discourses (pp. 273-291). Harlow, UK: Longman.
35.
White, R. ( 2000). International advertising: How far can it fly? In J. P. Jones (Ed.), International advertising: Realities and myths (pp. 29-40). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36.
Zou, S. ( 2005). Contributions to international advertising research: An assessment of the literature between 1990 and 2002. Journal of Advertising, 34, 99-110.
