Glossary entry (derived from question below)
French term or phrase:
le territoire visuel de l'instinct
English translation:
The instinctive domain of vision
Added to glossary by
RHELLER
Oct 19, 2003 16:17
21 yrs ago
1 viewer *
French term
le territoire visuel de l'instinct
French to English
Marketing
Branding
Le territoire visuel de l'instinct, c'est celui du passage entre l'action authentique, engagée, et la perception intime.
document marketing/branding
merci à mes amis
document marketing/branding
merci à mes amis
Proposed translations
(English)
Proposed translations
8 hrs
William Stein
Costa Rica
Costa Rica
Native in English
Costa Rica
Translations that read like originals
Native in: English (Variants: US, UK) 
Works in: French to English, German to English, Spanish to English, and 3 more.
Related KudoZ points
:
1737
Selected
The instinctive domain of vision
is the middle ground between authentic, committed action and intimate perception.
In the case of branding, it probably means that purchasing involves three distinct levels of awareness:
1) perception intime: the customer has a certain gut reaction to the product (unconscious)
2) instinctive domain of vision (this is the semiconscious area of branding, where the customer's sense of vision can be manipulated through subliminal advertisement and all kinds of subconscious suggestions)
3) the wholly conscious level of the purchase of the product, which is glorified as an "authnetic, committed act.
The key to branding is the middle ground: creating a striking logo, attractive package, suggestive associations, etc.
Le territoire is not a movement or transition: that's a basic misreading of the French. Le territore de l'instinct est CELUI (le territoire) du passage.... i.e. the place of passage.
There's also absolutely no indication of the direction. It's not stated "le passage d'A a B", but "le territoire de passage entre A et B", so the movement could be in either direction.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-10-20 13:48:10 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
This is all very well known. Here\'s an extract from an article in Time Magazine, more example:
The industry was already changing when Burnett joined the Homer McGee agency in Indianapolis, Ind., in 1919, after a brief stint as a newspaperman. Product claims were giving way to elaborate narratives--imaginary stories of consumers whose purchase had been rewarded with popularity, success, romance. Burnett moved the image to center stage. ***Visual eloquence, he was convinced, was far more persuasive, more poignant, than labored narratives, verbose logic or empty promises. Visuals appealed to the \"basic emotions and primitive instincts\" of consumers. ***Advertising does its best work, he argued in 1956, by impression, and he spent much of his career encouraging his staff to identify those symbols, those visual archetypes, that would leave consumers with a \"brand picture engraved on their consciousness.\"
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-10-20 13:57:59 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Here\'s the link if you\'re interested: www.time.com/time/time100/builder/profile/burnett.html -
In the case of branding, it probably means that purchasing involves three distinct levels of awareness:
1) perception intime: the customer has a certain gut reaction to the product (unconscious)
2) instinctive domain of vision (this is the semiconscious area of branding, where the customer's sense of vision can be manipulated through subliminal advertisement and all kinds of subconscious suggestions)
3) the wholly conscious level of the purchase of the product, which is glorified as an "authnetic, committed act.
The key to branding is the middle ground: creating a striking logo, attractive package, suggestive associations, etc.
Le territoire is not a movement or transition: that's a basic misreading of the French. Le territore de l'instinct est CELUI (le territoire) du passage.... i.e. the place of passage.
There's also absolutely no indication of the direction. It's not stated "le passage d'A a B", but "le territoire de passage entre A et B", so the movement could be in either direction.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-10-20 13:48:10 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
This is all very well known. Here\'s an extract from an article in Time Magazine, more example:
The industry was already changing when Burnett joined the Homer McGee agency in Indianapolis, Ind., in 1919, after a brief stint as a newspaperman. Product claims were giving way to elaborate narratives--imaginary stories of consumers whose purchase had been rewarded with popularity, success, romance. Burnett moved the image to center stage. ***Visual eloquence, he was convinced, was far more persuasive, more poignant, than labored narratives, verbose logic or empty promises. Visuals appealed to the \"basic emotions and primitive instincts\" of consumers. ***Advertising does its best work, he argued in 1956, by impression, and he spent much of his career encouraging his staff to identify those symbols, those visual archetypes, that would leave consumers with a \"brand picture engraved on their consciousness.\"
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-10-20 13:57:59 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Here\'s the link if you\'re interested: www.time.com/time/time100/builder/profile/burnett.html -
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Excellent reasoning William! I was very impressed by the high level of intellectual discussion here and the seriousness of thought. I appreciate it :-) I apologize that the context was bare. This is a short outline (a couple of lines and then a heading). The worst part is the French has some English words which seem to have been assigned new meanings.
Thanks to everyone :-)"
+1
7 mins
immediate visual perception field
instinctive visual territory... pas génial
Peer comment(s):
| agree |
Víctor Nine
48 mins
|
| agree |
margaret caulfield
1 hr
|
| disagree |
PRoTechEE
: see below. Neither "immediate" nor "field" or "territory" are on the target here
21 hrs
|
-1
7 mins
the instinct visual domain
does it make sense ?
Peer comment(s):
| disagree |
Jane Lamb-Ruiz (X)
: no
1 hr
|
| neutral |
PRoTechEE
: Sort of close, but IMAO "domain" is a dead wood in this context. Believe my suggestion more elegant avoids the pits. "Middle ground" solves this part.
21 hrs
|
+1
31 mins
visual input-based perception
...
Peer comment(s):
| agree |
Jane Lamb-Ruiz (X)
: input-based? all perception is input based..
1 hr
|
|
visual input! Thanks anyway!
|
-1
2 hrs
The visual field of the intinct or The instinctive visual field
The instinctive visual field lies in [OR is found in] moving from authentic, commited action to personal perception.
translation of passage de X à Y
lies in or in moving from x to y
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-10-19 18:27:07 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
the phrase pre-supposes that instincts have a visual field. Or here, instinct in the singular.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-10-19 18:29:49 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
When you move from authentic, commited action to personal perception, the instinct to SEE is what is in play. That I think is what it means....
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-10-19 18:37:18 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
FINAL: An instinctive field of vision appears when moving from authentic, commited action to personal perception.
LIGHTBULB!
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-10-19 18:38:07 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
In other words, when you get it, you see it.....gees
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-10-20 14:06:51 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Note to Prltechee
Sorry but I think you are wrong. It\';s better to take a given term and add an adjective than to take one that does not exist and add an adjective. visual field and field of vision translate territoire visuel, which in French too, is technical. SO to translate it using the technical term is correct here. In branding and marketing, this is an oft-used trick. Characterizing the visual field or the field of vision as being instinctual is perfectly fine. That\'s the metaphor. The field of vision has an instinct. That\'s the dumb idea they want to convey....And field of vision of course has two meanings, the technical one and what you see....as you yourself say, this is not your field, so I wonder why you weigh in so heavily. How can someone who admits that he or she is not familiar with something, then say what is best? That\'s a conundrum...
Peer comment(s):
| disagree |
PRoTechEE
: Sorry, Jane but "visual field" has completely different connotation of physical field of vision (like in Ophthalmoloy and Engineering). Nothing to do with kind of perception, instinct and such psychological phenomena which are obviously the subject here.
19 hrs
|
|
I changed it in my final: field of vision and a technical word can often work well in psychology
|
21 hrs
visually-driven (buying) instinct OR simply visual instinct
I think this term makes it much clearer what is meant even as a stand-alone.
"territoire" clearly refers here to the full phrase " territoire du passage" aptly translated by Will as "middle ground", so what is left is "visuel de l'instinct" = "visual instinct", which does not sound technical or specific enough, so I suggest to add at least one of 2 possible qualifiers: "Visually-driven instinct(-ive buying)" or "Visual buying instinct".
No need to confuse with field (of vision, which is something else) or domain, perception etc. dead wood!
Hope this clarifies it and kudos to Will w/o whose valuable contribution, I am not sure I could figure this out by myself, as I am not such an expert in branding! FYI, I come from upscale hi-tech marketing where you can't count on lowly packaging tricks, alas ;-)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-10-20 15:57:14 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
2 Will: > You say there\'s not enough context to judge but you are sure that my \"term is dissociated from meaning\"? -<
I am sorry I do. I had too little space in that note to put it better. But for one, I believe you quite correctly describe the \"middle ground\" as pertaining to the instinctive buying (buying instinct) driven (manipulated if you will) by subliminal visual stimuli (when retained in our brains called \"archetypes\" as in yr quote on branding), so calling it \"instinctive domain of vision\" is at best a misnomer.
Listen to the sound of it: it\'s like the insticts are a domain of vision instead of brain which is visually stimulated (please note the stimuli are *visual, and not of the vision, which is completely different thing!! i.e visual stimuli are what goes to the brain for further processing; vision stimuli serve the mere mechanics of vision). It makes no sense that *vision has its own instincts, responsible for no less than buying decisions. Also you have pinpointed out yourself correctly that \"territoire\" belongs to what you adroitly translate into \"middle ground\", so there is no word in French original left to be translated as \"domain\", so as I said before \"visual instinct\" is basically the abridged reference which is left, and which I tried to qualify for clarity and specificity and proper technical language, so even w/o context the term is self-explanatory (\"visual instinct\" does not seem to be enough in English, even though it may depend on wider context we don\'t have).
2 Jane,
if you seem to have the main beef with the basic interpretation Will suggested, so why rant against me? You don\'t seem to intimate why or where he is wrong, so all your editorializing about metaphor (why assume a metaphor in technical context and \"dumb\" to boot w/o the context??) simply is both misdirected and misguided.
I explained above again why. Please read everything carefully if you wish to contribute to the discussion positively. I wouldn\'t like to bore the readers by repeating myself. And I don\'t intend to.
As to the purported conundrum at the end of yr note, I quote:
<I wonder why you weigh in so heavily. How can someone who admits that he or she is not familiar with something, then say what is best? That\'s a conundrum... >
I think this so \"ad hominem\" and uncalled for that it begs to be ignored for the common good.
One thing I am perhaps to blame for is that I did not say that the marketing I did was heavily revolving around the various aspects of FOV subjects (optics electrooptics lasers including ophthalmic laser research) and I have electro-optical and biomedical engineering background. And I can tell you that FOV in French is certainly not \"territoire visuel\" (\"field\"
can translate into \"champ\" or sometimes \"terrain\" in French, \"territoire\" technically is more zone, WHILE FOV IS \"champ visuel\" OK? End of discussion!). The only thing I admitted to was that branding was not important for my type of job on everyday basis, but since Will filled me in so well I don\'t feel anymore the subject is so foreign to me either, hence u can imagine y \"I weigh in so heavily\". Still, like Will, I did not rate my confidence at the max (and unlike some people on this thread whose qualifications I am sorry to be unaware of), realizing my interpretation is only as good as his assumptions are.
More importantly tghough, I wonder why we should engage in sterile discussion, when a little more context by Rita Heller could shed more light on the subject matter, and the peculiar ways the French might have used their language (OMG, those \"faux amis\").
GTGN. Wish you all well.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-10-20 17:56:46 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
To wrap up the matter, Will, I realize my argument above may come across rather convoluted.
Let me try again to put it simply: The Time article you quote describes the phenomenon at hand as follows:
\'Visuals appealed to the \"basic emotions and primitive instincts\" of consumers. \' and
\'Visual archetypes, that would leave consumers with a \"brand picture engraved on their consciousness.\"
Don\'t you feel then that your \"The instinctive domain of vision\" suggests something rather completely different than the brain images subliminally driven by visuals and translating into instinctive buying decisions. We could perhaps talk about instinctive \"domain\" of buying behaviour but certainly not of the vision.
Thus, \"instinctive (visual) product perception\" conveys this idea much better because, unlike vision, perception involves also brain and memory functions, which are of critical importance here. Perhaps some people would prefer this more technically rewritten term over simple \"visually-driven instinctive buying\" whose main benefit is that it is simply closer to the original French phrase.
"territoire" clearly refers here to the full phrase " territoire du passage" aptly translated by Will as "middle ground", so what is left is "visuel de l'instinct" = "visual instinct", which does not sound technical or specific enough, so I suggest to add at least one of 2 possible qualifiers: "Visually-driven instinct(-ive buying)" or "Visual buying instinct".
No need to confuse with field (of vision, which is something else) or domain, perception etc. dead wood!
Hope this clarifies it and kudos to Will w/o whose valuable contribution, I am not sure I could figure this out by myself, as I am not such an expert in branding! FYI, I come from upscale hi-tech marketing where you can't count on lowly packaging tricks, alas ;-)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-10-20 15:57:14 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
2 Will: > You say there\'s not enough context to judge but you are sure that my \"term is dissociated from meaning\"? -<
I am sorry I do. I had too little space in that note to put it better. But for one, I believe you quite correctly describe the \"middle ground\" as pertaining to the instinctive buying (buying instinct) driven (manipulated if you will) by subliminal visual stimuli (when retained in our brains called \"archetypes\" as in yr quote on branding), so calling it \"instinctive domain of vision\" is at best a misnomer.
Listen to the sound of it: it\'s like the insticts are a domain of vision instead of brain which is visually stimulated (please note the stimuli are *visual, and not of the vision, which is completely different thing!! i.e visual stimuli are what goes to the brain for further processing; vision stimuli serve the mere mechanics of vision). It makes no sense that *vision has its own instincts, responsible for no less than buying decisions. Also you have pinpointed out yourself correctly that \"territoire\" belongs to what you adroitly translate into \"middle ground\", so there is no word in French original left to be translated as \"domain\", so as I said before \"visual instinct\" is basically the abridged reference which is left, and which I tried to qualify for clarity and specificity and proper technical language, so even w/o context the term is self-explanatory (\"visual instinct\" does not seem to be enough in English, even though it may depend on wider context we don\'t have).
2 Jane,
if you seem to have the main beef with the basic interpretation Will suggested, so why rant against me? You don\'t seem to intimate why or where he is wrong, so all your editorializing about metaphor (why assume a metaphor in technical context and \"dumb\" to boot w/o the context??) simply is both misdirected and misguided.
I explained above again why. Please read everything carefully if you wish to contribute to the discussion positively. I wouldn\'t like to bore the readers by repeating myself. And I don\'t intend to.
As to the purported conundrum at the end of yr note, I quote:
<I wonder why you weigh in so heavily. How can someone who admits that he or she is not familiar with something, then say what is best? That\'s a conundrum... >
I think this so \"ad hominem\" and uncalled for that it begs to be ignored for the common good.
One thing I am perhaps to blame for is that I did not say that the marketing I did was heavily revolving around the various aspects of FOV subjects (optics electrooptics lasers including ophthalmic laser research) and I have electro-optical and biomedical engineering background. And I can tell you that FOV in French is certainly not \"territoire visuel\" (\"field\"
can translate into \"champ\" or sometimes \"terrain\" in French, \"territoire\" technically is more zone, WHILE FOV IS \"champ visuel\" OK? End of discussion!). The only thing I admitted to was that branding was not important for my type of job on everyday basis, but since Will filled me in so well I don\'t feel anymore the subject is so foreign to me either, hence u can imagine y \"I weigh in so heavily\". Still, like Will, I did not rate my confidence at the max (and unlike some people on this thread whose qualifications I am sorry to be unaware of), realizing my interpretation is only as good as his assumptions are.
More importantly tghough, I wonder why we should engage in sterile discussion, when a little more context by Rita Heller could shed more light on the subject matter, and the peculiar ways the French might have used their language (OMG, those \"faux amis\").
GTGN. Wish you all well.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2003-10-20 17:56:46 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
To wrap up the matter, Will, I realize my argument above may come across rather convoluted.
Let me try again to put it simply: The Time article you quote describes the phenomenon at hand as follows:
\'Visuals appealed to the \"basic emotions and primitive instincts\" of consumers. \' and
\'Visual archetypes, that would leave consumers with a \"brand picture engraved on their consciousness.\"
Don\'t you feel then that your \"The instinctive domain of vision\" suggests something rather completely different than the brain images subliminally driven by visuals and translating into instinctive buying decisions. We could perhaps talk about instinctive \"domain\" of buying behaviour but certainly not of the vision.
Thus, \"instinctive (visual) product perception\" conveys this idea much better because, unlike vision, perception involves also brain and memory functions, which are of critical importance here. Perhaps some people would prefer this more technically rewritten term over simple \"visually-driven instinctive buying\" whose main benefit is that it is simply closer to the original French phrase.
Peer comment(s):
| neutral |
William Stein
: You just said that there wasn't enough context to know what was meant and now you are offering a very specific translation based on a narrow interpretation.
7 mins
|
|
Thnx for feedback. You are right, but still yr analysis sounds very plausible. As long as we don't have anything better, I go with it, wholly accepting everything you said except the title phrase in yr p.2. Explnd y it doesn't sound right, offer altrntive
|
|
| neutral |
Jane Lamb-Ruiz (X)
: upscale hi-tech marketing also works with metaphor; all language except math is metaphor....so figure
19 mins
|
|
Jane, please read carefully Will's analysis esp interpretation of territoire as referring to passage and not vision. I agree with that. U don't say what's wrong with that, bt u+yr "phrase presuppose instincts have a visual field". LOL 4 meta4!
|
Something went wrong...