Should all business signs be in English?

9:00 AM Tuesday May 15, 2012

The non-English signs add character, Mayor Len Brown says. Photo / Greg Bowker

The proliferation of non-English signs in Auckland is making some Kiwis uncomfortable, says a Massey University researcher.

Robin Peace and Ian Goodwin studied 500 "linguistic landscape" photographs taken in five Auckland locations for their study, "The Cosmopolitics of Linguistic Landscapes".

Dr Peace said ethnic signs would give a sense of relief for new migrants from that language community, but could also make local residents uncomfortable.

Debate on this issue is now closed. Here is a selection of Your Views:

YouKNOWItsTheTruth (New Zealand) | 09:45AM Tuesday, 15 May 2012

The blurb at the top of this column states that, "the proliferation of non-English signs in Auckland IS making some Kiwis uncomfortable, says a Massey University researcher". This then changes to, "ethnic signs would give a sense of relief for new migrants from that language community, but could also make local residents uncomfortable". Which is it? They do, or they could? Has anyone actually been offended or made to feel uncomfortable by signs in a foreign language? Or is this the Herald trying to stir up racism?
If anyone has been offended, I suggest they take a trip to Thailand, Singapore or Hong Kong and see all of signs in English. Take a look at the McDonald's and Nike and Mobil billboards. And all of the signs for streets and public transport, etc.
It's not like Kiwi expats and tourists go and live in Thailand and are expected to be able to read and speak Thai. So why should we expect Asians to come here and speak English?
If you go to London, there are Australian and New Zealand pubs. Why? Because it provides comfort to unadventurous Antipodeans on their OE. Do you think the English are offended by it? Are we offended by Irish pubs? What if they have a Gaellic name?

WarwickH-S () | 09:46AM Tuesday, 15 May 2012

I can understand a person being uncomfortable with a sign that they can't read, but then, do they actually want to read it? The ethnic signs are a communication of a message targeted at a particular audience. If I want to sell Tongan kava, my potential customer base is Pacific Islanders, so my sign will be in Tongan, Samoan, and Fijian. A classic example would be the "tupe lafo" signs; Are there ANY non-Polynesians interested in the slightest? I doubt it. Similarly, how many non-Asians are truly interested in the Chinese sign advertising 100 year eggs or the Thai script announcing a meeting for the Thai Songkran celebration preparations? Do those that dislike the signs really want to have the Urdu sign advertising Pakistani pickles translated just so that they too can read it?
I think it is xenophobia that decries the ethnic signs. Xenophobia and a feeling of inadequacy in that many foreigners are bi-lingual yet they themselves are limited to just English.

Herald censors opinion to isolate viewpoints (Auckland Central) | 09:46AM Tuesday, 15 May 2012

I think they look pretty. Also they say to me that there is a high likelyhood that the associated establishment has a product I will want to buy, at the price I want to pay and with outstanding service.
I have seen Maori on signage only to find it was a cynical attempt by the store owner, who lived in a very diffent location, to make Maoris feel welcome so they could be overcharged. Language is a form of branding and the key thing is that if one store uses it they should be highly critical of stores that undermine that branding for exploitive purposes.