See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316625303
Phonology of brand naming
Article · April 2017
DOI: 10.17959/sppm.2017.23.1.3
CITATIONS
READS
2
1,797
1 author:
Jong-mi Kim
Kangwon National University
36 PUBLICATIONS 112 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Jong-mi Kim on 22 March 2018.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
http://dx.doi.org/10.17959/sppm.2017.23.1.3
3
Phonology of brand naming*
Jong-mi Kim
(Kangwon National University)
Kim, Jong-mi. 2017. Phonology of brand naming. Studies in Phonetics,
Phonology and Morphology 23.1. 3-26. To determine what makes a brand name
sound appealing and easy to pronounce by people of many nationalities and mother
tongues, we surveyed 384 people from 45 native language backgrounds using 50
artificial brand names composed of 25 phonetically contrasting pairs. The results
showed that the respondents preferred brand names that obey certain phonological
principles, particularly the theories of markedness and phonotactic constraints. The
results were robust and consistent, indicating the ability to explain preferences using
two very different survey methods: (1) an onsite paper survey for members of an
institute and (2) an online web survey for unknown volunteers. The results were also
consistent across three different languages, English, Korean and Chinese, that belong
to different language families. Based on these results, this paper proposes guidelines
for creating phonologically well-formed brand names. This study adds an empirical
explanation to the theories of markedness and phonotactic constraints. (Kangwon
National University)
Keywords:
brand naming, naming phonology, phonotactics, markedness theory,
business names, product names
I. Introduction
What makes a new brand name easy to pronounce, recognize and remember? Being
easy to pronounce and appealing to hear in many languages is a critical part of brand
naming in the global marketplace. This seemingly unrealistic goal may not result in a
hyperbolic claim but a reasonable one, if well supported by linguistic theories on one
hand and empirical data on the other from a respectable number of languages
*
This study was supported by 2015 Research Grant from Kangwon National University (No.
520150377). An earlier version of this study was presented at the 2016 American Name
Society Conference in Washington DC and PhonLunch at the University of Southern
California. The author acknowledges audience members and anonymous reviewers for the
feedback.
4 Jong-mi Kim
explored. In fact, many organizations do use linguist advisors when creating brand
names (Schmitt and Zhang 2012: 655). In this study, we compare 25 pairs of
artificial brand names created in accordance with several phonological principles and
guidelines. Our findings highlight the phonological guidelines that result in the bestsounding brand names across 45 languages.
1.1 Phonological markedness and phonotactics
We suggest certain principles and guidelines in referencing established phonological
claims and preference studies across languages. The phonological theory of
markedness categorizes common types of sounds in relation to unusual or difficultto-pronounce sounds in a marked-unmarked relation (Greenberg 1966, Moravcsik
and Wirth 1986 and many others). For example, an unmarked syllable is composed
of a single consonant followed by a vowel, as in the word mama or ‘mother’ in many
languages. This type of syllable is found universally in the babbling stage of child
development (Jakobson 1962). In contrast, a complex syllable with a consonant
cluster, as in the English word screw, is marked because this type of syllable is
unusual or difficult to pronounce in other languages (Yavas 2016: 222-224).
Meanwhile, the phonological theory of phonotactics defines the permissible
sequence of sounds in a particular language (Blevins 2003, Hayes and Wilson 2008
and many others). For example, English phonotactics allow a consonantal cluster
within a syllable, as in straw, while Japanese and Korean phonotactics do not. As a
result, those who speak Japanese or Korean as native speech may utter the English
word straw [sɯtɯɾo] in three syllables because the onset sequence /str/ does not
conform to the phonotactic constraints of Japanese and Korean.
1.2 Point of investigation for brand naming
We hypothesize that brand names that best conform to the phonological principles of
markedness and phonotactics are preferred by international customers. For example,
we hypothesize Pensing to be preferred to Prensing because a consonant cluster such
as [pr] is a marked form and is not phonotactically allowed in a syllable onset
position in many languages. By conducting two surveys, one online and one offline,
we test whether artificial brand names sound better when they accord with the
phonological principles of markedness and phonotactic constraints.
Phonology of brand naming 5
1.3 Significance
This study is important for two reasons: practical and theoretical. In practice, it is not
yet known whether phonological claims can apply to brand naming in the
international domain. Few researchers have addressed the phonological issue, while
available studies are mainly on sound symbolism1 that discuss preferred consonants
or vowels for given product types (Klink 2000, 2001, 2003, Yorkston and Menon
2004, Lowrey and Shrum 2007, Shrum et al. 2012, Yoo 2015). In contrast, we
discuss in this paper the phonological sequence and representation of sounds that
affect brand naming efficacy.
From the theoretical viewpoint, we hope that this study will be able to add the
empirical explanation to the theories of markedness and phonotactic constraints. We
believe that we have found innovative phonological guidelines through our survey in
which the participants selected artificial brand names consisting of more common
segments and preferred sounds, as suggested by the theories of markedness and
phonotactics.
For expositional convenience, the phonological cues are categorized in order of
syllable structure, sound sequence, sound quality, and spelling. We then describe the
details of our survey methods and present the results. We demonstrate that these
results are correctly explained by our proposed phonological cues. We then show the
reliability of these results and the robustness of their application when naming a new
brand designed for international marketing.
2. The proposal: Phonological cues
We propose several phonological cues classified into four categories as guidelines
for brand naming. The remainder of this article tests the validity of these selected
phonological cues in brand naming.
It is important to notice that we are not making theoretical claims in this work, but
proposing some phonological cues, because claims can be unsubstantiated in even a
large-scale investigation involving hundreds of respondents. That being the case, we
assert that such phonological cues can be proposed on the basis of a manageable1
Sound symbolism is the study of the relationship between the sound of an utterance and its
meaning (Hinton et al. 2006: backcover).
6 Jong-mi Kim
scale research, representative of many speakers and different language groups.
Furthermore, we are strongly cautioned against confusing the substantiation of
research hypotheses about respondent preferences with conclusively demonstrating
the validity of certain theories used to possibly explain those linguistic preferences.
In other words, demonstrating that something happened is not the same as proving
why something happened. We specifically ask whether international customers prefer
brand names with the following phonological structure as outlined below.
2.1 Preferred syllable structure
The brand names found in category (1) illustrate the three types of preferred syllable
structure in terms of syllable onset in (1a), syllable coda in (1b), and CV syllables in
(1c)2. Henceforth, preferred examples of brand names are printed in boldface and
presented in contrast to a less preferred counterexample.
(1) Preferred Syllable Structure
a. No consonant cluster in an onset position (e.g., Pensing>Sprensing)
b. No consonant cluster in a coda position (e.g., Sisun>Sisunts)
c. CV syllables3 (e.g., Dina>Din)
First, we hypothesize that international customers will prefer the brand name Pensing
to Sprensing in (1a) because the latter contains the consonant cluster spr, making it a
“marked” syllable onset. Second, the brand name Sisun will be preferred to Sisunts in
(1b) because the latter contains the consonant cluster nts, indicating a “marked” syllable
coda. Finally, the brand name Dina will be preferred to Din in (1c) because the former
has a less marked syllable structure, i.e., a single consonant followed by a single vowel.
2.2 Preferred sound sequence
The brand names in category (2) illustrate the preferred sound sequence for a brand
in terms of syllable length in (2a), syllable position in (2b) and phonotactics in (2c).
2
3
These three structures in (1) are considered to be unmarked forms of syllables as proposed
by Jakobson (1962), Eckman et al. (1986) and many others. Markedness is a relative
concept and its empirical evidence may be provided by this study.
The syllables begin with a single consonant followed by a single vowel and no coda consonant.
Phonology of brand naming 7
(2) Preferred Sound Sequence
a. Two syllables (e.g., Bindang>Bindangsi)
Three light syllables (e.g., Binaro>Binarodi)
b. A nasal stop for a syllable coda (e.g., Tinsem>Tisnem)
c. English phonotactics for a consonant (e.g., Seboon>Seboong)
English phonotactics for a vowel (e.g., Oray>Orae)
For (2a), we hypothesize that international customers will prefer the optimal and
unmarked lengths of brand names with two syllables or three light syllables. In other
words, the brand name with two syllables or three light syllables, as in Bindang or
Binaro in (2a) will be preferred to Bindangsi or Binarodi because the length of the
former is “less marked (Broselow et al. 1998)4.”
For (2b), we hypothesize that international customers will prefer the brand name
Tinsem to Tisnem, because the former contains a nasal stop n that is a less “marked”
syllable coda than a fricative s5.
The names proposed in (2c) address language-specific constraints in English
regarding sound sequences known as “phonotactics.” We hypothesize that
international customers will prefer brand names that obey the phonotactic constraints
of English because English is considered as the international language that is likely
to be spoken as a first, second or third language by the greatest number of potential
customers. For example, customers will prefer Seboon to Seboong because the
English language does not allow the sound sequence [u] followed by [ŋ] (Ladefoged
and Johnson 2017: 106). For another example from English phonotactics, customers
are expected to prefer the brand name Oray to Orae because the vowel [æ] is not
allowed at the end of English words.
4
5
Broselow et al. (1998) claims that the bi-syllabicity effects result from universal
markedness, while Robertson (1989) justifies the desirability of simplicity in a brand name
by the psychological principle that a simple bit of information is more easily learned and
recalled.
A nasal stop in a coda position is considered unmarked or less marked. A nasal stop is
common coda for languages, so that Japanese and Chinese allow nasal stops for their
extremely limited set of coda consonants. The Korean language allows both a nasal and
oral stop, but not a fricative consonant in syllable coda.
8 Jong-mi Kim
2.3 Preferred sound quality
The brand names identified in category (3) illustrate the preferred sound quality in
terms of sound impression in (3a), easy pronunciation in (3b) and common sounds in
(3c).
(3) Preferred Sound Quality
a. Light and happy impression (e.g., Samonan>Sumoonen)
b. Easy pronunciation (e.g., Kandi>Kkandi)
c. Common sound (e.g., Pumbi>Peumbi)
We expect that the brand name Samonan will be preferred to Sumoonen in (3a)
because the former contains vowels with light, happy connotations as in Korean
phonology (Kim 1977)6. Although sound impressions seem to be language specific in
their role in the vowel harmony of the Korean language, there are more hypotheses
about which segments have what connotations for languages in general
(Fischer-Jørgensen 1978, Yoo 2015 and many others)7. The issue is the relative
preference of the sound, though not the number of languages, as attested in 45
languages spoken by the respondents in the study.
For our second example in (3b), we hypothesize that Kandi is preferred to Kkandi
because the latter contains a more difficult pronunciation kk. The sound kk
(transcribed in Korean official Romanization system) is a tense laryngealized stop
that has greater motor demands than the other two phonation types, given its pressed
voice quality (negative H1–H2) and its relatively high f0 value at vowel onset, wordinitially (Kong et al. 2011).
6
7
In Korean phonology, vowel harmony consists of light vowels [a, o, æ], dark vowels [u, ɯ, ʌ, ɛ],
and neutral vowels [i]. The alternation between the given vowels regularly bring a connotation
shift in the embedding words, as in /piŋkɯl/ ‘(turn) round and round’ /pæŋkɯl/ ‘round and
round (the circle involved is smaller).’ Consonantal alternation also brings a similar connotation
shift, as in /piŋkɯl/ ‘round and round’ /phiŋkɯl/ ‘round and round (the movement is more
powerful and faster).’ All plain series of consonants have simple connotation, while tense and
aspirated series of consonants bring stronger and faster connotation.
Fischer-Jørgensen (1978) claimed that the vowel [i] was used in words for ‘little,’ whereas
80% of the words for ‘big’ contain back vowels. Yoo (2015) proposed varied consonants (f, t, k)
to have big and strong connotations depending on positions in words. Seven more studies
were mentioned in Section 1.3 that discuss sound symbolism in relation to product types.
Phonology of brand naming 9
For the third set of examples, we hypothesize that Pumbi is preferred to Peumbi
because the latter contains the high back unrounded vowel eu [ɯ]. This vowel is
uncommon, because the universal tendency for round vowels is to be back vowels
(Archangeli 1997).
2.4 Preferred spelling
The brand names in category (4) illustrate preferred spellings of words and include
examples of uncommon sounds identified in the previous discussion in Section 2.3.
(4) Preferred Spelling
a. Familiar spelling (e.g., Youngsin>Yeongsin)
b. Familiar spelling using common consonant structures (e.g., Kandi>Kkandi)
c. Familiar spelling using common vowel structures (e.g., Pumbi>Peumbi)
We hypothesize in (4a) that Youngsin will be preferred to Yeongsin because the latter
contains a spelling sequence that is less familiar in English. Alden et al. (1999) suggest
that using English words, written and/or spoken, is one pathway through which certain
brands come to be perceived by consumers as “global.” For English written forms, the
spellings of the word pairs in (4) are compared in that the word on the left side
corresponds to English sound forms, while the word on the right side does not (See
Yavas 2016: 257-264 for phoneme-grapheme correspondences in English).
This prediction holds for unfamiliar spellings derived from unfamiliar consonants
and vowels, as in (4b) and (4c), which are taken from our previous examples (3b)
and (3c). For examples of consonants, we hypothesize that the names Kandi, Tandi,
Pandi, and Sandi are preferred to Kkandi, Ttandi, Ppandi, and Ssandi because the
latter set contains unfamiliar spellings of uncommon consonantal sounds. For
examples of vowels, Pumbi and Pombi will be preferred to Peumbi and Peombi,
because the latter set contains unfamiliar spellings of uncommon vowel sounds. The
terms “uncommon” and “unfamiliar” are relative in linguistic markedness.
For the sake of simplicity, we reduced the data number by merging these test items
for unfamiliar spellings in (4b&c) with those for uncommon sounds in (3b&c). Given
that our research setting is an airport, the speakers of different languages must rely
solely on spelling of the new brand names, and they do not have access on these new
names in dialogues of daily conversation. For this reason, we do not need to analyze
10 Jong-mi Kim
uncommon sound independently from unfamiliar spelling. Although there is an
obvious relationship between spelling and pronunciation, orthography and phonology
are not one and the same. We simply merged the data for a practical reason, but not
for phoneme-grapheme correspondence.
3. Methodology
This section provides (a) the selection and recruitment methods for respondents; (b)
basic demographic data about the respondents (age, socio-economic level, gender,
learned languages vs. native languages, and proficiency levels in learned languages);
(c) the survey data and the form, (d) the languages used in the surveys given; (e) the
procedure for presenting the brand names to the respondents; (f) the amount of time
given to complete the surveys; and (g) the statistical tests used and the reasons.
3.1 Subjects
A total of 384 volunteer subjects—237 via an onsite paper survey and 147 via an
online web survey—completed a questionnaire comparing 25 pairs of brand names
and identified which word in each pair was easier to pronounce, recognize, and
remember. The recruitment methods for respondents were to advertise in a university
affiliated Korean language institute in Korea for the paper survey, and to make an
online event in a university social media site in the United States for the web survey.
The majority of subjects were university students, and a few were teachers and
administrators at a university. All subjects in the paper survey were college educated
with a middle socio-economic status. Their ages ranged from 18 to 29. The gender
distribution varied language to language without noticeable preponderance. The
demographic information for the web survey is considered similar to the paper
survey8. The subjects were all volunteers and received a small gift for the paper
survey or a small amount of money through a mobile payment service.
8
Access to this social media website was restricted to university account holders. Their age,
gender, education, socio-economic status, and English proficiency were inferred from their
names, student statuses at a top private university, and the use of preferred mobile payment
methods popular among college students. The web survey did not ask to include every
detail of personal information, in order to keep the task complexity to a manageable level
and time. On the other hand, all demographic information in the paper survey was verified.
Phonology of brand naming 11
The subjects were asked to specify their names and native language backgrounds.
The demographics of the respondents in terms of language backgrounds are shown in
Table 1. All participants for the paper survey spoke Korean and English, while the
participants for the web survey spoke English, as either learned languages or native
languages. The proficiency levels in learned languages for the paper survey varied
and ranged from beginner to advanced levels with fairly even distribution. The
English proficiency of the web survey participants is considered high to native level9.
The selection of respondents in the paper survey was based on inconsistent
markings (multiple checkmarks for one word or missing evaluations). Respondents
were excluded if they had inconsistent markings for five words (10%) or more in the
survey. In contrast, all the respondents in the web survey were selected for data
acquisition because the software prevented inconsistent markings.
Table 1. Number of Survey Respondents by Native Language (n=45 languages)
Count
Count
Language
Language
(Percentage)
(Percentage)
Albanian
1 (0.3%) German
2 (0.5%) Malay
Amharic
1 (0.3%) Hindi
4 (1.0%) Marathi
Arabic
13 (3.4%) Hungarian
1 (0.3%) Mongolian
Armenian
1 (0.3%) Indonesian
4 (1.0%) Nepali
Azerbaijani
1 (0.3%) Japanese
11 (2.9%) Persian
Bengali
1 (0.3%) Kazakh
1 (0.3%) Pilipino
Burmese
3 (0.8%) Khmer
4 (1.0%) Polish
Cantonese
3 (0.8%) Kinyarwanda
3 (0.8%) Portuguese
Chinese*
60 (15.6%) Korean
72 (18.8%) Rumanian
Croatian
1 (0.3%) Kurdish
2 (0.5%) Russian
English
91 (23.7%) Kyrgyz
1 (0.3%) Serbian
French
8 (2.1%) Lao
2 (0.5%) Sinhalese
Language
Count
Count
Language
(Percentage)
(Percentage)
4 (1.0%) Spanish
14 (3.6%)
1 (0.3%) Swedish
1 (0.3%)
21 (5.5%) Telugu
1 (0.3%)
1 (0.3%) Thai
4 (1.0%)
4 (1.0%) Turkish
2 (0.5%)
2 (0.5%) Urdu
2 (0.5%)
3 (0.8%) Uzbek
14 (3.6%)
2 (0.5%) Vietnamese
6 (1.6%)
1 (0.3%) Yoruba
1 (0.3%)
6 (1.6%)
1 (0.3%)
Total
384 people
2 (0.5%)
*Mandarin Chinese
3.2 Question items
The 25 pairs of brand names were carefully designed in accordance with the
proposed phonological cues in the preceding section. Table 2 shows all 25 name
9
Students needed to demonstrate their proficiency in English as part of the application
process with the TOEFL score at or above 100 iBT with a minimum score of 20 in each
subsection for the TOEFL.
12 Jong-mi Kim
pairs and the relevant phonological cues that may affect the pronunciation in various
languages. The phonological cue numbers refer to the corresponding numbers in the
previous Section 2.
Table 2. Question Items by Phonological Cue (n=50 items)
No. Preferred
1 Pensing
2 Bansing
3 Mendil
4 Sisun
5 Sarok
6 De
7 Dina
8 Bemin
9 Emon
10 Bindang
11 Binaro
12 Binarodi
13 Tinsem
Not preferred
Sprensing
Blansing
Smendil
Sisunts
Saroct
E
Din
Betmin
Ekmon
Bindangsi
Binarodi
Binarodisen
Tisnem
Phonological cue
(1a) Onset cluster
(1a) Onset cluster
(1a) Onset cluster
(1b) Coda cluster
(1b) Coda cluster
(1c) CV syllable
(1c) CV syllable
(1c) CV syllable
(1c) CV syllable
(2a) Syllable length
(2a) Syllable length
(2a) Syllable length
(2b) Coda consonant
No. Preferred
14 Vanglin
15 Satoon
16 Seboon
17 Suday
18 Oray
19 Besay
20 Samonan
21 Coron
22 Bora
23 Kandi
24 Pumbi
25 Youngsin
Not preferred
Voonglin
Satoong
Seboong
Sudae
Orae
Besae
Sumoonen
Coorun
Bura
Kkandi
Peumbi
Yeongsin
Phonological cue
(2c) [u] followed by [ŋ]
(2c) [u] followed by [ŋ]
(2c) [u] followed by [ŋ]
(2c) Final [æ]
(2c) Final [æ]
(2c) Final [æ]
(3a) Sound impression
(3a) Sound impression
(3a) Sound impression
(3b) Easy pronunciation
(3c) Common sound
(4a) Familiar spelling
3.3 Procedure
Onsite paper surveys were distributed to volunteer participants at a language institute in
a big national university in Korea. The languages used in the paper survey were both
Korean and English. Assistants helped the participants in Korean, English and Chinese.
The web survey was posted on an online event page of a big private university website
in the U.S. The instruction language was only English. There was no language assistant
available to help the participants in the web survey.
The participants were asked to rate how appealing the names sounded on a scale from
one to five in the paper survey, while a four-point scale was used in the web survey to fit
smart phone screens. Thus, for the paper survey, responses were categorized as very bad,
bad, so-so, good and very good. For the web survey, the response categories excluded
so-so10. The survey items were randomized both among and within the pairs.
The amount of time the respondents spent to complete the surveys was 10 minutes
on average. There was no time limit. For analysis, we used t-test so that the two
10
To reduce a five-point scale to a four-point scale to fit smart phone screens, we kept only
two degrees of goodness and two degrees of badness and excluded the neutral value. The
separate results for the web and paper surveys are shown in Table 7.
Phonology of brand naming 13
members of each pair could be compared and assessed for significance. We chose ttest for analysis, because this test shows whether the score differences of two given
groups are statistically significant.
4. Results
On the whole, the survey results supported our hypotheses. Each result from every
pair was statistically significant, as shown by the t-test values in Tables 3 to 6. For
expository purposes, we present the results in the same order as our previous
discussion on phonological criteria: (1) syllable structure, (2) sound sequence, (3)
sound quality and (4) syllable length.
4.1 Preferred syllable structure
Our hypotheses on syllable structure was supported by the given pairs of examples;
respondents tended to give higher ratings to brand names with no onset or coda
cluster, or those with CV syllables. Table 3 provides the full list of artificial brand
names that were paired by contrasting syllable structures in the survey.
Table 3. Preferred words by Syllable Structure (n=384)
Brand Names†
Segments in Contrast†
Preference Score‡
(a)
No Onset Cluster
Sprensing < Pensing
Blansing < Bansing
Smendil < Mendil
spr < p
bl < b
sm < m
3.0 < 3.6***
3.3 < 3.5*
2.9 < 3.6***
(b)
No Coda Cluster
Sisunts
Saroct
< Sisun
< Sarok
nts < n
ct < k
2.4 < 3.7***
2.7 < 3.6***
(c)
CV Syllable
E
Din
Betmin
Ekmon
< De
< Dina
< Bemin
< Emon
e
din
bet
ek
3.3 < 3.5*
3.5 < 4.0***
3.0 < 3.5***
3.1 < 3.7***
< de
< di
< be
<e
*
p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 by t-test
† The boldface type shows the preferred forms.
‡ The preference score is the average value of the scale from 1 (very bad) to 5 (very good).
n indicates the number of respondents.
In table 3, the phonological preferences in the first column meet the name
preference in the second column that embeds the preferred segments in the third
column. The fourth column shows the average score of preference to each name, in
14 Jong-mi Kim
which each preferred name obtained a higher score than its less preferred counterpart.
The score differences of all pairs of words were statistically significant by t-test as
shown by asterisks (*) at the end of each pair of scores. The responses were obtained
from a total of 384 people.
The preferred syllable structure had no onset cluster in (3a) such as spr, bl and sm,
no coda cluster in (3b) such as nts and ct and only a single consonant followed by a
single vowel in (3c) such as de, di and be. In row (c) of Table 3, the preference of e
over ek in the brand names Emon and Ekmon was interesting11. The syllable e was
considered closer to the CV structure without a coda, when compared to ek that had a
coda.
4.2 Preferred sound sequence
Our hypotheses related to sound sequences were also supported for the given pairs of
examples; more respondents chose those brand names with two syllables or three
light syllables, a nasal stop for a syllable coda, or a tense vowel in a syllable ending
with a vowel. Table 4 provides the full list of artificial brand names that were paired
by contrasting sound sequences in the survey.
In row (a) of Table 4, the most preferred syllable number was two syllables or
three light syllables, as in Dina, Bindang and Binaro, or the results favored the word
in the pair with a syllable count closest to that number. The preferred words were
identified by segmental sequences with some variation rather than those that were
overly simple or overly complex. Therefore, the respondents chose Binaro over
Binarodi or Binarodisen, both of which have too many syllables. Likewise, they
chose Binarodi, which consists of four syllables, but not Binarodisen, which has five
syllables. In contrast, the respondent chose Dina over Din, which has two syllables
rather than one.
11
This pair of words happens to include real personal names, which the researcher was not
aware of until after the completion of the study. The words were not eliminated from the
study, as some other words were also revealed to be real words or names in some
languages.
Phonology of brand naming 15
Table 4. Preferred Words by Sound Sequence (n=384)
Brand Names†
Din
< Dina
(a)
Bindangsi < Bindang
2 Syllables or
Binarodi
< Binaro
3 Light Syllables
Binarodisen < Binarodi
(b)
Tisnem
< Tinsem
Coda Nasal
Voonglin
< Vanglin
Satoong
< Satoon
(c)
Seboong
< Seboon
English
Sudae
< Suday
Phonotactics
Orae
< Oray
Besae
< Besay
Sound Sequence
Preference Score‡
in Contrast†
1 < 2 syllables
3.5 < 4.0***
3 < 2 syllables
2.6 < 3.6***
4 < 3 syllables
2.9 < 3.8***
5 < 4 syllables
2.3 < 3.4***
sn < ns
2.7 < 3.4***
*[ uŋ ] < [æŋ ]
*[ uŋ ] < [ un ]
*[ uŋ ] < [ un ]
final [æ] < [ eɪ ]
final [æ] < [ eɪ ]
final [æ] < [ eɪ ]
2.9 < 3.7***
3.0 < 3.7***
2.9 < 3.6***
3.0 < 3.4***
3.0 < 3.7***
2.9 < 3.4***
*
p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 by t-test
† The boldface type shows the preferred forms.
‡ The preference score is the average value of the scale from 1 (very bad) to 5 (very good).
n indicates the number of respondents.
In row (b) of Table 4, the preferred coda consonant was a nasal stop, as in n in
tinsem, rather than a fricative, as in s in tisnem. In row (c) of Table 4, the sequence
conforming to English phonotactics was preferred over the sequence that does not.
Thus, the respondents did not prefer the sound sequence [u] followed by [ŋ], as in
Voonglin, Satoong or Seboong; rather, they preferred the sequence of a different
vowel or consonant, as in Vanglin, Satoon or Seboon. In addition, the word final
segment could not be the lax vowel [æ], as in Sudae or Besae, but the tense vowel
[aɪ], as in Suday or Besay, was accepted.
4.3 Preferred sound quality
Our hypotheses related to sound quality were supported by the given pairs of
examples; the international respondents overwhelmingly selected the brand names
containing vowels with light and happy connotations, those that are easy to
pronounce, and those composed of common sounds. Table 5 provides the full list of
artificial brand names that were paired by contrasting sound quality in the survey.
16 Jong-mi Kim
Table 5. Preferred Words by Sound Quality (n=384)
Sumoonen < Samonan
Coorun < Coron
Bura
< Bora
Sounds in
Contrast†
su < sa
coo < co
bu < bo
Preference
Score‡
2.4 < 3.5***
2.9 < 3.7***
3.1 < 4.1***
Kkandi
< Kandi
kka < ka
2.5 < 3.9***
Peumbi
< Pumbi
peu < pu
2.5 < 3.7***
Brand Names†
(a)
Light and Happy
Impression
(b)
Easy to Pronounce
(c)
Common Sounds
*
p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 by t-test
† The boldface type shows the preferred forms.
‡ The preference score is the average value of the scale from 1 (very bad) to 5 (very good).
n indicates the number of respondents.
In row (a) of Table 5, the preferred sound impression was light and happy, as with
the vowels [a] and [o] in the names Samonan, Coron, and Bora. Despite the varying
hypotheses about which segments have what connotations (Fischer-Jørgensen 1978,
Kim 1977, Yoo 2015), the survey results in Table 5 validated the connotations of
Korean phonology in the domain of universal languages, by grouping light vowels
and dark vowels for vowel harmony (Kim 1977).
In row (b) of Table 5, the preferred sound was chosen to be easy to pronounce, as
in the name Kandi, but not Kkandi. Stops with a single letter ([k], [t], and [p]) are
easier to pronounce than those with double letters ([kk], [tt], and [pp]), which
represent tense consonants with subglottal pressure in Korean.
In row (c) of Table 5, the sound u is more common than eu, representing then
unrounded high vowel [ɯ]. Thus, the respondents preferred Pumbi, containing the
vowel [u], over Peumbi, containing the vowel [ɯ].
4.4 Preferred spelling
Our hypotheses related to familiar spellings were supported by the given set of
examples; more respondents chose the brand names with familiar rather than
unfamiliar spellings. For example, the international respondents preferred the
common spelling ou to the unfamiliar spelling eo for the mid back unrounded vowel
[ʌ]. Korean respondents also showed a statistically significant (p<.001) preference
for ou over eo, although eo is officially used in Korea (See Korean Official
Phonology of brand naming 17
Romanization System). Table 6 shows the full list of artificial brand names paired by
contrasting spellings in the survey. As shown, the familiar spellings (ou, k, u) were
preferred over the unfamiliar spellings (eo, kk, eu). The unfamiliar spelling forms of
eo, kk, and eu are the official Romanized forms used in Korea.
Table 6. Preferred Words by Spelling (n=384)
(a) Familiar Spelling
Brand Names†
Spelling in
Contrast†
Preference Score‡
Yeongsin < Youngsin
eo < ou
3.0 < 3.6***
< Kandi
kk < k
2.5 < 3.9***
Peumbi < Pumbi
eu < u
2.5 < 3.7***
(b) Familiar Consonant Kkandi
(c) Familiar Vowel
*
p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 by t-test
† The boldface type shows the preferred forms.
‡ The preference score is the average value of the scale from 1 (very bad) to 5 (very good).
n indicates the number of respondents.
In row (a) of Table 6, the most preferred spelling was chosen to be familiar in
English (e.g., Youngsin vs. Yeongsin). In row (b) of Table 6, the familiar spelling for
consonants was preferred (e.g., k in Kandi rather than kk in Kkandi). In row (c) of
Table 6, the familiar spelling for vowels was preferred (e.g., u in Pumbi rather than
eu in Peumbi). Recall that we used the same items in rows (b&c) of Table 5 and in
the rows (b&c) of Table 6 to reduce the number of questions and to reduce the
cognitive burden on the respondents. The reduced results then refer to only 10
proposed phonological cues instead of 12 cues in Section 2. The following sections
will therefore discuss the overall results from only these 10 phonological cues.
4.5 Robustness of the results
The results were robust regardless of the survey method used or the native language
background of the respondents. Our hypotheses were supported regardless of the
survey methods we employed: (1) an onsite paper survey for members of an institute
and (2) an online web survey for unknown volunteers. In terms of language
background, the three largest groups of native speakers in our study spoke English,
Korean and Chinese (Mandarin). Mandarin Chinese and English are the most widely
spoken languages (Ladefoged and Disner 2012: 158, Table 14.1), and Korean is the
18 Jong-mi Kim
language spoken in the geological location for our onsite paper survey. These
languages belong to different language families (Indo-European, Ural-Altaic and
Sino-Tibetan). Our hypotheses were supported across all three language groups.
Table 7 below demonstrates the robustness of the results by method. For both of
the web and paper survey methods, the respondents preferred the brand names on the
right without exception. Each of these brand names conforms to our phonological
prediction.
Table 7. Robustness of Results by Survey Method:
a Paper Survey and a Web Survey
Scores in
Paper
No.
Brand Names
Survey‡
(n=237)
Sprensing<Pensing 3.1<3.6***
(1) Blansing<Bansing
3.3<3.4
Smendil<Mendil
3.0<3.6***
Sisunts<Sisun
2.4<3.6***
(2)
Saroct<Sarok
2.7<3.6***
E<De
3.4<3.6*
Din<Dina
3.6<4.0**
(3)
Betmin<Bemin
3.1<3.5***
Ekmon<Emon
3.0<3.8***
Bindangsi<Bindang 2.6<3.5***
(4) Binarodi<Binaro
2.9<3.8***
Binarodisen<Binarodi 2.4<3.4***
(5) Tisnem<Tinsem
2.8<3.4***
†
Scores in
Web
Survey‡
(n=147)
2.8<3.8***
3.2<3.5*
2.7<3.7***
2.3<3.7***
2.4<3.6***
3.2<3.3
3.4<3.8***
2.9<3.6***
3.2<3.7**
2.5<3.6***
2.8<3.8***
2.1<3.4***
2.6<3.5***
Scores in
Paper
No.
Brand names
Survey‡
(n=237)
Voonglin<Vanglin12 3.0<3.3***
Satoong<Satoon
3.1<3.5***
Seboong<Seboon
3.0<3.6***
(6)
Sudae<Suday
2.9<3.4***
Orae<Oray
3.0<3.7***
Besae<Besay
2.9<3.4***
Sumoonen<Samonan 2.6<3.5***
(7) Coorun<Coron
3.0<3.6***
Bura<Bora
3.2<4.0***
(8) Kkandi<Kandi
2.6<3.9***
(9) Peumbi<Pumbi
2.6<3.6***
(10)Yeongsin<Youngsin 3.0<3.6***
†
Scores in
Web
Survey‡
(n=147)
2.7<3.5***
2.7<3.7***
2.7<3.6***
3.2<3.5*
3.0<3.8***
2.9<3.4***
2.3<3.5***
2.8<3.7***
3.0<4.3***
2.4<3.8***
2.5<3.7***
2.9<3.7***
*
p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 by t-test
† The boldface type shows the preferred names. Names in each box characterize specified phonological
properties: (1) onset cluster, (2) coda cluster, (3) CV syllable, (4) syllable length, (5) coda nasal, (6)
English phonotactics, (7) sound symbolism, (8) easy pronunciation, (9) common sound and (10)
familiar spelling.
‡ Each score represents the average value of the preference on a scale from 1 (very bad) to 5 (very good).
n indicates the number of respondents for each survey.
12
This pair of words was used only in the web survey. We used another word pair, Woonglin
and Wanglin, for our paper survey without knowing that one of these words is an actual
brand name. The results were the same and statistically significant (p<.001) for both the
web and paper surveys.
Phonology of brand naming 19
As shown in Table 7, all the brand names in bold were consistently chosen
regardless of whether the survey was delivered in a paper form at a specified time in
a classroom or in an online version with unrestricted time and location. All results
support our 10 proposed phonological cues for brand naming. Most of the choices
were statistically significant according to a t-test, as shown by the asterisk marks in
Table 7 (*). We therefore have shown that the results are robust regardless of
whether they were obtained from the paper or web survey methods.
Furthermore, the results were consistent for different groups of native language
backgrounds. Table 8 below demonstrates the robustness of the results by language
background. Of the 45 native language backgrounds in this study, 91 respondents
(23.7%) spoke English, 72 respondents (18.8%) spoke Korean, and 60 respondents
(15.6%) spoke Chinese (Mandarin). For each of these three language groups, the
results differed only slightly. No question yielded statistically significant results in
opposition to our hypotheses.
Table 8. Robustness of Results by Language Background:
English, Korean and Chinese
No.
Brand Names†
(n=50)
Scores by
Scores by
Scores by
English Speakers‡ Korean speakers‡ Chinese speakers‡
(n=91)
(n =72)
(n=60)
Sprensing<Pensing
(1) Blansing<Bansing
Smendil<Mendil
Sisunts<Sisun
(2)
Saroct<Sarok
2.8<3.8***
3.1<3.5*
2.5<3.7***
2.3<3.7***
2.4<3.9***
2.9<3.7***
3.4>3.2
2.9<3.7***
2.4<3.6***
2.4<3.4***
3.4>3.2
3.2<3.5
3.3=3.3
2.8<3.6***
3.1<3.3
E<De
Din<Dina
(3)
Betmin<Bemin
Ekmon<Emon
Bindangsi<Bindang
(4) Binarodi<Binaro
Binarodisen<Binarodi
3.2=3.2
3.4<3.9**
2.8<3.6***
3.4<3.5
2.6<3.6***
3.0<3.8***
2.1<3.4***
3.3=3.3
3.8<3.9
2.7<3.5***
2.8<3.8***
2.3<3.4***
2.7<3.8***
2.2<3.3***
3.2<3.8**
3.4<3.8
3.4>3.2
3.1<3.6*
2.6<3.4***
2.7<3.3***
2.5<3.2**
(5) Tisnem<Tinsem
2.5<3.5***
2.6<3.4***
3.0<3.4*
Voonglin<Vanglin
Satoong<Satoon
(6)
Seboong<Seboon
Sudae<Suday
2.6<3.5***
2.8<3.7***
2.9<3.6***
3.3=3.3
2.8<3.3***
2.7<3.5***
2.9<3.4**
2.5<3.4***
3.1<3.3
2.8<3.4**
2.7<3.6***
3.1<3.7***
20 Jong-mi Kim
Orae<Oray
Besae<Besay
Sumoonen<Samonan
(7) Coorun<Coron
Bura<Bora
3.0<3.8***
2.8<3.4***
2.3<3.5***
2.8<3.6***
3.0<4.3***
3.0<3.7***
2.7<3.2**
2.1<3.4***
2.8<3.8***
2.9<4.2***
3.0<3.8***
3.2<3.8**
2.5<3.3***
3.0<3.4*
3.1<3.8***
(8) Kkandi<Kandi
2.3<3.9***
2.6<3.7***
2.7<3.7***
(9) Peumbi<Pumbi
2.4<3.7***
3.0<3.7***
2.3<3.6***
2.8<3.5***
2.8<3.4**
3.0<3.6*
(10) Yeongsin<Youngsin
*
p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 by t-test
† The boldface type shows the preferred names. Names in each box characterize specified phonological
properties: (1) onset cluster, (2) coda cluster, (3) CV syllable, (4) syllable length, (5) coda nasal, (6)
English phonotactics, (7) sound symbolism, (8) easy pronunciation, (9) common sound and (10)
familiar spelling.
‡ Each score represents the average value of the preference in the scale from 1 (very bad) to 5 (very
good).
n indicates the number of respondents for each language. Three reversed scores (marked >) were
identified, but these variations were not statistically significant.
As shown in Table 8, brand names in bold letters, those that followed the proposed
naming conventions, were chosen in a majority of cases, regardless of the native
language of the speaker. Most of the choices were statistically significant according
to a t-test, as shown by the asterisks (*). Only three pairs of brand names received
unexpected ratings by the speakers of certain language groups. The ratings of these
names are bolded in Table 8. However, these variations were not statistically
significant, as shown by the omission of the asterisk (*).
5. Discussion and conclusion
In summary, we assert that all of the hypotheses were substantiated based on the
following 10 phonological cues. For all 25 pairs of artificial brand names, the survey
participants did correctly select the names consisting of more common segments and
preferred sounds in our hypotheses. The phonological base consists of the following
10 cues.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
A singleton consonant is preferred over a consonant cluster for a syllable onset.
A singleton consonant is preferred over a consonant cluster for a syllable coda.
A syllable with one initial consonant and no coda consonant is preferred.
A name composed of two syllables or three light syllables is preferred to the
names consisting of a single or too many syllables.
Phonology of brand naming 21
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
A nasal stop consonant is preferred over a fricative consonant for a syllable coda.
The sound sequence should conform to the phonotactic constraints of English.
The sounds should have a preferred sound impression.
The sounds should be easy to produce.
The sounds should be less marked and common in many languages.
The name should have a familiar spelling.
The positive results from this study indicate that the naming of brands marketed
internationally should be based on these specific phonological forms. The results are
based up the well-established phonological theories of phonotactics and markedness.
The results were robust across survey methods and groups with different native
language backgrounds. That is, the results suggest very useful, practical principles
that can be taken up by practitioners in the field of brand-naming.
The paper’s premise, including its research and the analysis of results, offers solid
insight into international brand naming. In particular, to the best of our knowledge,
the study is the first attempt to represent the wide range of native languages among
survey respondents. The unusual results, with nearly perfect prediction of hypotheses
as to which item in each pair of names would be preferred, deserves further comment
to underscore the validity of the principles for international brand name choice that
are proposed.
We point out that there is a clear trend found in the form which the respondents
preferred. This does not mean that the author automatically concludes that the only
reason for this preference is the proposed phonological structure. There may be a
number of other explanations which could have played a role in this choice (e.g. the
order in which the options were presented; the familiarity with the sound forms; the
language background of the respondents; the ways in which the respondents were
asked to make a choice; the demography of the respondents; the selection of
consonants and vowels; etc.)
The author is fully aware of the methodological limitations of this study. First,
markedness is a relative and ill-defined notion. The test name data can be made in
different ways without defining how marked the newly made names may be.
Secondly, some participants of the paper survey did not understand the instruction
either in Korean or in English due to low proficiency in the learned languages. We
included these low-level participants by helping them in language instruction in their
22 Jong-mi Kim
own native languages. For some less known language, we could not hire a helper in
their own native language, but in their second best language or English.
This research goal is rather ambitious, and yet very important to meet the needs of
brand name characteristics in modern international trades. Despite the respectable
number of languages explored, it is quite challenging to determine what makes a
brand name attractive to persons of “many nationalities and mother tongues.” The
results may not represent what “people” prefer but what the respondents in this study
preferred. And yet, it is worthy to note that the results for different language groups
were nearly perfect for the given data set. We thus conclude that markedness and
phonotactics in human speech behavior suggest strategically desirable brand name
phonology.
Appendix: Survey Form
We present below the paper survey form we used in this study. The same survey
form was used for the web survey, but a modification was made to fit in cellular
phones, which would be more easily accessible by young participants. Namely, the
neutral scale “so so” was eliminated, while keeping all four contrasts on the sides of
good and bad.
Best Sounding Brand Names
★
★
★
★
★
★
================================================================
This is a list of airport shops. Please rate which brand name is easier to
pronounce, recognize and remember in each pair. Circle the score that you want to
give for each word.
다음은 공항가게들의 이름입니다. 각각의 이름 쌍 중 어느 브랜드 이름이 더욱
발음하기 좋고 기억하기 좋은지 점수를 매기시오. 각 단어별 해당 점수에
동그라미를 치세요.
Phonology of brand naming 23
Seboon
Seboong
Tisnem
Tinsem
Samonan
Sumoonen
Satoong
Satoon
Youngsin
Yeongsin
Pensing
Sprensing
Ekmon
Emon
Blansing
Bansing
Suday
Sudae
Binarodi
Binaro
Bindangsi
Bindang
E
De
Coorun
Coron
1
2
3
4
5
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
24 Jong-mi Kim
Pumbi
Peumbi
Mendil
Smendil
Kandi
Kkandi
Sisun
Sisunts
Sarok
Saroct
Binarodi
Binarodisen
Bemin
Betmin
Bora
Bura
Woonglin
Wanglin
besay
besae
orae
oray
Dina
Din
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
very bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
bad
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
so so
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
very good
REFERENCES
ALDEN, DANA L., JAN-BENEDICT E. M. STEENKAMP and RAJEEV BATRA. 1999. Brand
positioning through advertising in Asia, North America, and Europe: The role
of global consumer culture. Journal of Marketing 63.1, 75-87.
ARCHANGELI, DIANA. 1997. Optimality Theory. Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science.
BLEVINS, JULIETTE. 2003. The independent nature of phonotactic constraints: an
alternative to syllable-based approaches. In Féry Caroline and Ruben van de
Vijver (eds.). The Syllable in Optimality Theory, 375–403. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
BROSELOW, ELLEN, SU-I. CHEN and CHILIN WANG. 1998. The emergence of the
unmarked in second language phonology. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition 20.2, 261-280.
Phonology of brand naming 25
ECKMAN, FRED. R., EDITH A. MORAVCSIK and JESSICA R. WIRTH. (eds.). 1986.
Markedness. Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Linguistics Symposium of
the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 1983. NY: Plenum Press.
FISCHER‐JØRGENSEN, ELI. 1978. On the universal character of phonetic symbolism
with special reference to vowels. Studia Linguistica, 32.1‐2, 80–90.
GREENBERG, JOSEPH. 1966. Language Universals. The Hague: Mouton.
HAYES, BRUCE and COLIN WILSON. 2008. A maximum entropy model of
phonotactics and phonotactic learning. Linguistic Inquiry, 39.3, 379–440.
HINTON, LEANNE, JOHANNA NICHOLS and JOHN J. OHALA. 2006. Sound Symbolism.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
JAKOBSON, ROMAN. 1962. Why ‘mama’ and ‘papa’? In Roman Jakobson (ed.).
Selected Writings 1 in Phonology. Vol. I: Phonological Studies, 538–545. The
Hague: Mouton.
KIM, KONG-ON. 1977. Sound symbolism in korean. Journal of Linguistics 13.1, 67–75.
KLINK, RICHARD R. 2000. Creating brand names with meaning: The use of sound
symbolism. Marketing Letters 11.1, 5-20.
________________. 2001. Creating meaningful new brand names: A study of
semantics and sound symbolism. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice
9.2, 27-34.
________________. 2003. Creating meaningful brands: The relationship between
brand name and brand mark. Marketing Letters 14.3, 143-157.
KONG, EUN JONG, MARY E. BECKMAN and JAN EDWARDS. 2011. Why are Korean
tense stops acquired so early?: The role of acoustic properties. Journal of
Phonetics 39, 196-211.
KOREAN OFFICIAL ROMANIZATION SYSTEM. 2000. [The current edition in official use].
Ministry of Culture and Tourism, Republic of Korea. http://www.korean.go.
kr/front/page/pageView.do?page_id=P000148&mn_id=99
LADEFOGED, PETER and KEITH JOHNSON. 2017. A Course in Phonetics (7th edition).
Boston: Thomson Wadsworth..
LADEFOGED, PETER and SANDRA FERRARI DISNER. 2012. Vowels and Consonants.
New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
LOWREY, TINA M. and LARRY J. SHRUM. 2007. Phonetic symbolism and brand name
preference. Journal of Consumer Research 34.3, 406-414.
26 Jong-mi Kim
MORAVCSIK, EDITH A. and JESSICA R. WIRTH. 1986. Markedness: An overview. In
Fred. R. Eckman, Edith A. Moravcsik and Jessica R. Wirth. (eds.).
Markedness. NY: Plenum, 1-11.
ROBERTSON, KIM. 1989. Strategically desirable brand name characteristics. Journal
of Consumer Marketing 6.4, 61-71.
SCHMITT, BERND and SHI ZHANG. 2012. Selecting the right brand name: An
examination of tacit and explicit linguistic knowledge in name translations.
Journal of Brand Management 19.8, 655-665.
SHRUM, L. J., LOWREY, T. M., LUNA, D., LERMAN, D. B. and LIU, M. 2012. Sound
symbolism effects across languages: Implications for global brand
names. International Journal of Research in Marketing 29.3, 275-279.
YAVAS, MEHMET. 2016. Applied English Phonology (3rd edition). New Jersey: John
Wiley & Sons.
YOO, JINHOON. 2015. Jaeum eumseong sangjingeul iyonghan yeongeo joeo
brandmyongei sobija inji yeongu (A study on customer perception on brand
names with consonant sound symbolism). Journal of Language Sciences 22.4,
39-65. The Korean Association of Language Sciences.
YORKSTON, ERIC and GEETA MENON. 2004. A sound idea: Phonetic effects of brand
names on consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Research 31.1, 43-51.
Jong-mi Kim
Department of English Language and Literature
Kangwon National University
1 Kangwondaehak-gil, Chuncheon-si,
Gangwon-do, 24341 Republic of Korea
e-mail: kimjm@kangwon.ac.kr
received: November 15, 2016
revised: March 10, 2017
accepted: April 10, 2017
View publication stats