Lost in translation: how different Chinese labels for “negotiation” shape competitiveness

Purpose Why are Chinese negotiators, contrary to theoretical expectations, often competitive? Classical negotiation theories grounded in culturally etic and Western-centric assumptions are unable to address this puzzle. This research aims to adopt a culturally emic and psycholinguistic perspective to investigate whether and how two semantically equivalent Chinese labels for negotiation – tanpan (谈判) and xieshang (协商) – shape Chinese negotiators’ competitiveness. Design/methodology/approach The authors first conduct a pilot study to establish that tanpan and xieshang are semantically equivalent and represent the most common Chinese translations of the English word negotiation. The authors then conduct four multi-method studies to examine whether and how tanpan – compared with xieshang – elicits stronger competitiveness among Chinese negotiators in their perceptions and behaviors. Findings The label tanpan elicits stronger competitiveness than xieshang for Chinese individuals, in terms of their mental association (Study 1), normative strategy (Study 2), anger expression (Study 3) and news semantic orientation (Study 4). In addition, the tanpan vs xieshang labeling effect is mediated by negotiators’ planned strategies (Study 3), indicating that it reflects a deliberate cognitive process beyond an automatic heuristic response. Originality/value This research offers a novel explanation for the puzzle of competitive Chinese negotiators by highlighting the influence of semantic framing in shaping negotiation dynamics. It also acknowledges that language functions as both a bridge and a barrier in negotiation contexts, providing actionable guidance for practitioners facing Chinese negotiation counterparts.