Verisign

Pronounceability (does it pass the radio test?)

Discussion in '"Short" Domain Discussion' started by Corey, Jan 5, 2017.

Replies:
35
Views:
1,687

  1. carob

    carob Active Member VIP

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Posts:
    2,499
    Likes Received:
    2,708
    I'm not sure it does fail the radio test - it's interesting that in this thread there seem to be different definitions here of radio test. I'd give it a low PassMinus or PassMinusMinus rating because it can be pronounced, and remembered because it corresponds to a known word, minus because there is only one known word it corresponds to so users easily assume that instead of trying to differentiate between the possibilities they know of.

    Cough.com - does that pass the radio test?

    What about rough.com?

    By the way, I realise I listen to more radio ads than I used to now via online radio and streaming, and I never view any graphics or text with them.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2017
    The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
  2. Corey

    Corey DomainStudio.com.au VIP

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Posts:
    10,122
    Likes Received:
    9,715
    let me put it this way,

    my name Corey may not pass the radio test.

    However, Corey.com is a 5 L CVCVC or a CVCVY.

    If it was available I would buy it even though it may not pass the radio test.

    Cheers
    Corey
     
  3. 168

    168 Active Member VIP

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2015
    Posts:
    959
    Likes Received:
    1,066
    Good Point. Radio test would have to assume "commonly known spelling" vs pronouncability.
    Cheers
     
  4. aramyus

    aramyus Established Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2014
    Posts:
    518
    Likes Received:
    427
    I adapted this code, but I was not happy with the results.

    I took a different approach for pronounceability: I first built a table of decomposed english word into groups of letters. My separators are diphtongs/voyels and groups of consonants. I do the same for a given domain, and I check if each subset of letters can be found in my table of decomposed english words. If yes, I consider the word as pronounceable, and vice versa.

    If I take your example funy, I decompose it into f/ fu/ fun/ uny/ ny/ y.
    I notice that each group is used in an other english word and hence it's pronounceable.

    However, some subsets are not that common. For example uny is used in only 6 english words that include puny, unyielding, bunyan. None of these words are very common.

    On the contrary, unny (for funny) is used more often and in more common english words such as sunnyvale, runny, gunny

    This thread's discussions gave me the idea to build a pronounceability index that would take in account the frequency a group of letters is used in english and the frequency at which these english words are used in the english books.

    I assume 'funy' will have a much smaller pronounceability index than 'funny', and this index could be used to have an idea of how easily it would pass the radio test.

    I know it's not as straightforward as it can seem. One big problem I face are brands that have become part of our common vocabulary (think IBM, realtor, tumblr, flickr...) Clearly, IBM is not pronounceable, yet it would pass the radio test. IBMer would probably pass it too, and it's not really prounounceable either.
     
  5. Eckhart

    Eckhart Eckhart.net VIP

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2015
    Posts:
    1,138
    Likes Received:
    464
    If you tell someone to go to funy.com the obvious assumption will be funny.com, so I say it doesn't pass the radio test, but 'cough' doesn't have a similar sounding word and will pass radio test because people will assume it's indeed cough... the problem would be with kough.com. Anyway, my example may not be the strongest and probably we could find a better one, but ultimately the point is there are plenty of names that fail radio test and still sound great.

    I see your point. The frequency should be just one of the factors of the index and you could add others that will influence the score, such as.. if it also matches a pattern such as CVCV or VCVC it gets higher score... if the 2 vowels are the same it gets better score (more melodic).. if the vowel is A it gets better score than if the vowel is U.. and so on, we can refine it with more rules.
     
  6. Kuffy

    Kuffy Established Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2016
    Posts:
    1,853
    Likes Received:
    3,118
    How will you account for regional, lazy, and incorrect pronunciation and spelling. "color" is one obvious example - it seems to be the result of lazy pronunciation of "colour". "math" is yet another example - it is used as a short form for the multiple disciplines of mathematics. And then there is insure - it really isn't the same as ensure.

    Oh dear - I'd better stop now. before I mention the hard and immensely annoying skedule that is becoming common.
     
  7. carob

    carob Active Member VIP

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Posts:
    2,499
    Likes Received:
    2,708
    I don't see a formal radio test returning a yes/no result, more of a ranking. And it could be part of a family of tests.

    The radio test itself could have different factors and the user could decide which is most important - correct spelling, existing dictionary word, pronounceablity, uniqueness, number of syllables, pattern, price, availability, similar usage by others... the list could get a bit long so yes you need to narrow it down to something practical, and be clear what you are excluding.
     
  8. aramyus

    aramyus Established Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2014
    Posts:
    518
    Likes Received:
    427
    Radiotest, pronounceability, memorability... are not a guarantee of sellability.

    For me, they are just indicators, among others, to detect if a domain is worth or not more investigation.

    For now, if I had to choose between Radiotest and pronounceable, I'd choose radiotest.

    But I am sure we can find many flaws and many exceptions in each indicator.
     
  9. James Rayers

    James Rayers Active Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Posts:
    1,339
    Likes Received:
    451
    The 'radio test' is really just a cleaner way of asking 'how easy is it to understand on the phone'. A lot of business is still done on the phone, so it's a relevant an important test.

    Audio advertising does still have a role but less so radio. More likely podcasts.

    If you're looking for something that truly passes the radio test you shouldn't be going for made up terms. It should be solid dictionary words. eg. 'Good Website Design' not 'Gooweb'.
     
  10. Bram C.

    Bram C. AlmightyDomains.com + Domainative.com VIP

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2010
    Posts:
    1,255
    Likes Received:
    1,655
    Color is simply the preferred spelling in American English, and colour is preferred in all other main varieties of English. It is not a result of lazy pronunciation of the word "colour". All Americans write "color", not "colour". They teach the word "color" in school, it is the correct spelling in America. Color.com would pass the radio test in America and would probably fail the radio test in Australia for example.

    This is also interesting:


    Source: http://grammarist.com/spelling/color-colour/
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2017
  11. 168

    168 Active Member VIP

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2015
    Posts:
    959
    Likes Received:
    1,066
    "One big problem I face are brands that have become part of our common vocabulary"

    Good point ! Our creativity will always mess with the logic.Language is dynamic. Timely. I don't think there is a reliable formula. I don't see voice commands overcoming this either.
    Other good examples is Vans Context ? is it shoes or vehicles. Sick - health or Sick -awsome ?
    Pronounceable / radio test may be more useful for descriptive purposes rather than value as so many "brandables" value lies in the development.

    Carob said,
    "the list could get a bit long so yes you need to narrow it down to something practical"
    Another good point,
    What are stable value indicators are 1. Short or memorable (common phrases), 2.Ubiquitous either regionally or globally, 3. Relevance in category or vertical both being dynamic yet a slow moving variable.
    I think if the parameters were limited to these 3 categories one could get a somewhat reliable statistic.
    Domains outside these parameters will always be a wild card with lots of variables. Trading ranges may be easier to track than perceived value based on pronounceable / radio test etc.
    Happy Hunting
     

Want to reply or ask your own question?

It only takes a minute to sign up – and it's free!
Topics / Tags:

Share This Page

Loading...