So many people in Argentina mispronounce “Pepsi” as “Pecsi” that the company has responded by changing its name—an unprecedented campaign for the brand giant.

Given Spanish phonetics with an Argentine accent, “Pecsi” is easier to pronounce, and an estimated 25% of the country says it that way. Advertising Age writes:

The motive was clear: to get closer to consumers, by including those who weren’t pronouncing the name of the brand correctly but also by focusing on saving and standing by consumers’ sides in a time of crisis. In Argentina, drinking a Pepsi costs one peso less than drinking a Coke. The message: If you drink Pepsi, you save. If you drink Pecsi, you save as well.

So far, the campaign is has created a ton of buzz, and people are responding. The writers reporting on this story make a great point: not only does Pepsi recognize how consumers feel about the brand, it made a bold move to show it and get closer to the people.

The commenters on this article make some good points, too:

“jakesdxb” in Dubai: The visual identity should never change, no matter which market. What next? ‘Bebsi’ for Middle Eastern markets because that’s how it’s pronounced in Arabic?

“jms1027″ in Dallas: Brilliant and bold! Love marketers who aren’t afraid to slaughter sacred cows when it’s time to eat. 

“franny” in Berlin: Well done Pepsi! I think it’s cool when a brand thinks differently and does something to really be in the side of the people.

Whether Pepsi’s campaign actually represents the will of the people or is just a great PR ploy is up to debate, but no one can argue that the idea has tapped into a cultural sensitivity that consumers really connect with.

Click here to read the full article. Here you can watch the 30-second Pepsi campaign for TV:

Two Cherokee groups in North Carolina, the Cherokee Nation (CN) and Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (EBCI), worked together to translate modern words during a recent Language Revitalization Symposium.

Among other terms, the Cherokee representatives there came up with translations for “helicopter” and “purse,” from similar words in Cherokee. “Tsi-yu a-di-quo-lv-de-yo” is “plane that spins,” and “a-de-la di-ga-l(o)-do-di” is “where money is put.” If the translators could not decide on a common word between the two Cherokee groups’ dialects, they placed an “E” next to the Eastern Band’s preference and a “W” (for Western) next to the CN’s preference.

Jackson said the consortiums don’t always create Cherokee words for English words because an old Cherokee word that isn’t being used is sometimes rediscovered by the group.

“It may just be words we have not heard or forgotten. When you bring this many strong speakers together oftentimes there’s already a word. We might have known it and never pronounced or said it,” he said.

During the meeting, about 25 men and women told stories of how their parents or grandparents described objects, plants, places, events and people. They also shared how they pronounce words.

Keeping the language up-to-date is of importance to the Cherokee immersion school, where children learn all subjects in their native language. “Every time we are thinking of a word we always say ‘are the kids going to understand?” said one of the consortium members.

Read more about the Symposium and the Cherokee language here.

While federal law requires that criminal and civil courts provide an interpreter for people with limited English proficiency, the New York Times reports that in many states, interpreters are scarce in civil cases. In 35 states with the largest immigrant populations, 46% do not require that an interpreter be provided, and 80% fail to guarantee that the court will pay for the services.

Stakes can be just as high in civil cases as criminal, and a person’s inability to articulate his case, or understand what’s going on in the courtroom, can mean the difference between justice and injustice. Wisconsin appellate court judge Richard S. Brown explains:

“Civil cases can involve denial of constitutional property rights, termination of parental rights, statutory rights to be free from harassment and stalking, consumer transactions, foreclosures and a host of other matters,” Judge Brown said.

“If a person cannot understand what is happening in the courtroom proceeding, an unfair result might occur. And that is contradictory to what we want our courts to do: administer justice, fairly and impartially.”

Costs for interpretation services have risen over the past few years, which prevents debt-ridden states like California from complying with the policy. Anti-immigrant groups are also in opposition, believing that it sends a message that it’s “O.K. not to learn English.”

Read more about the debate in the full article.

In an interesting review of the World Bank’s policy to conduct all business in English, Rebecca Harris, a service coordinator at the Bank Information Center, points out some major flaws.

Community groups in Yemen, for example, petitioned for an Arabic translation (the national language) of the conditions placed on a $51 million grant to their government. The World Bank denied the translation, suggesting they translate it themselves—a cost double that of the average Yemeni’s per capita GDP.

Harris argues that by denying translation to its constituents, the World Bank will lose credibility among those it serves. The World Bank’s published documents aren’t exactly easy to access in the first place, undermining interested parties’ capability to be part of the process.

This argument holds not just in Yemen but across the approximately 140 eligible borrowing countries where the World Bank is in the business of trying to help the poor (with whom it, ironically, often cannot communicate). It is in the Bank’s interest to cut down its language barrier and talk to the real people. Civil society understands the local realities that will propel a project either to success or failure far better than any expatriate could.

Harris urges the World Bank to adopt a more participatory and transparent system, or else it will lose public support. Click here to read more.