Most SaaS companies that localize into Japanese translate their English style guide. That approach fails because an English style guide cannot specify the things Japanese readers actually notice: honorific level, script choice policy, sentence-final form, and punctuation conventions. Without those specifications, every translator and tool makes different default decisions — and the product accumulates a register patchwork that erodes trust. This article covers what a Japanese brand voice guide must contain and how to build one.
English brand voice guides typically address tone (friendly, authoritative, direct), vocabulary (plain language, no jargon), sentence structure (short and active), and things to avoid (passive constructions, filler phrases). These are useful for English translators and writers. They are insufficient for Japanese for a precise reason: Japanese has grammatical features that English does not, and those features carry brand signal whether you specify them or not.
When a translator opens a piece of Japanese copy without a brand voice guide, they make default decisions on: the honorific ending attached to every sentence, whether a borrowed term is written in katakana or translated into kanji, how to punctuate dialogue and emphasis, how long to make sentences before breaking them, and what word to use for "you." Every one of those decisions is visible to a Japanese reader and contributes to the brand's perceived register. Leave them unspecified and the brand voice is determined by each translator's individual default — which produces a patchwork across translators, tools, and surfaces.
A complete Japanese brand voice guide contains sections that have no English equivalent:
The first and most impactful dimension of Japanese brand voice is honorific level — specifically, where the brand sits on the です/ます spectrum. This is not the same as formality in English. English uses vocabulary and sentence structure to signal formality. Japanese uses grammatical endings that attach to every sentence, so the honorific level decision affects every piece of copy the brand produces.
The practical spectrum for B2B SaaS runs from ultra-formal (でございます endings, 貴社 for "your company," elaborate set phrases like 誠にありがとうございます) to accessible-professional (standard です/ます, お客様 for the user, active constructions) to casual (plain forms, フレンドリー tone, second-person pronouns). Very few SaaS companies should sit at the ultra-formal end — it reads as stiff and creates distance in a product context. Very few should sit at the casual end for B2B — it reads as disrespectful of the organizational relationship.
The useful specification for most B2B SaaS brands is accessible-professional, but that descriptor is not actionable without examples. The guide should include:
The guide should specify not just which endings to use but which vocabulary markers belong at the target level. At accessible-professional: お客様 (not あなた, not 貴殿); 御社 only in formal sales documents (not in product UI); ご連絡 rather than 連絡 for contact-related phrases; but plain nouns (機能, 設定, 料金) rather than their formal equivalents throughout.
Japanese B2B copy mixes three scripts — kanji, hiragana, and katakana — and borrowed technical terms can appear in any of them. The brand voice guide's katakana policy must answer: for each key term used in the product, which script form is approved? A blanket rule ("use katakana for all English-origin terms") produces errors because some borrowed terms have a kanji standard in Japanese business usage and using katakana signals foreign unfamiliarity.
The katakana policy should be a term list, not a rule. The list specifies the approved form for each term with the reason (kanji standard exists / no kanji equivalent / brand name uses katakana). It also lists forbidden alternatives — for instance, if the brand uses ダッシュボード, the list explicitly marks 制御盤 and 管理画面 as non-approved alternatives, even though 管理画面 is technically a reasonable description of a dashboard page.
| Term | Approved Form | Forbidden Alternatives | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Settings | 設定 | セッティング | Kanji standard. セッティング reads as informal. |
| Dashboard | ダッシュボード | 管理画面、制御盤 | Katakana standard. No accepted kanji equivalent. |
| Workflow | ワークフロー | 業務流れ、業務フロー | Katakana preferred. 業務フロー acceptable in formal docs only. |
| Automation | 自動化 | オートメーション | Kanji preferred. オートメーション acceptable in technical contexts. |
| Integration | 連携 | インテグレーション | 連携 is cleaner and more widely understood in B2B. |
| Notification | 通知 | ノーティフィケーション | Kanji standard. The katakana form is never used in Japanese UI. |
| Template | テンプレート | ひな形、書式 | Katakana is the SaaS standard. ひな形 reads as document-filing, not SaaS. |
| Support | サポート | 支援、援助 | Katakana is fully naturalized and the standard on support pages. |
| Free trial | 無料トライアル | フリートライアル、無料試用 | 無料 (kanji) + トライアル (katakana) is the market standard phrasing. |
| User | ユーザー | 利用者、使用者 | ユーザー in product UI; お客様 in marketing and support copy. |
Japanese punctuation has conventions that differ from Western standards, and brand copy that applies Western punctuation rules to Japanese text reads as unlocalized even when the words are correct. The brand voice guide should specify the following punctuation decisions.
Quotation marks: Japanese uses 「」(single corner brackets) for standard quotations and 『』(double corner brackets) for quotations within quotations or for book and product titles. Using Western double quotes ("") in Japanese body copy reads as typographically foreign. The exception is technical strings, variable names, or UI labels that must be reproduced literally — those may be wrapped in Western quotes or backticks per convention.
Ideographic full stop: Japanese uses 。(U+3002) rather than a Western period at sentence end. This should be handled automatically by the font and input method, but should be explicitly documented because MT output occasionally produces Western periods in Japanese text, and the QA rule should catch it.
The interpunct (・) as a separator: Japanese uses ・(U+30FB) rather than a bullet point or slash when listing items inline. ・is also used in foreign names written in katakana (エアー・ビーアンドビー rather than エアービーアンドビー). The guide should specify whether the brand uses ・ for inline lists and how it handles Western proper nouns in katakana.
Parenthetical notes: Japanese uses ()(fullwidth parentheses, U+FF08 / U+FF09) rather than Western half-width parentheses. Using half-width () in Japanese body copy creates inconsistent character width that Japanese typographers specifically avoid.
Japanese sentence length is a more precise specification than English sentence length because Japanese characters are uniformly wide and the sentence-final predicate position creates a specific readability effect: as sentences grow longer, the reader must hold more information in memory before reaching the predicate that determines the meaning of everything that preceded it.
A practical target for Japanese B2B brand copy is 40–60 characters per sentence. Below 30 characters, sentences feel abrupt and telegraphic — appropriate for UI microcopy but not for explanatory or marketing copy. Above 70 characters, sentences accumulate subordinate clauses that delay the predicate, requiring readers to hold more in working memory than is comfortable for a brand context.
Every Japanese brand voice guide needs a forbidden expressions list — phrases that are technically correct Japanese but that read as generic, robotic, or tonally wrong for the brand. The most common offenders in SaaS localization come from two sources: set phrases that MT and inexperienced translators default to, and direct translations of English phrases that produce grammatically correct but socially awkward Japanese.
The most overused set phrase in Japanese SaaS copy is ご利用いただきありがとうございます — thank you for using our service. It appears at the top of every notification email, every onboarding screen, and every support message. It is not wrong. It is so standardized that it has become invisible, and in excess it signals that no one thought carefully about the opening of this communication. The guide can specify: use once per communication maximum, only at the start of formal transactional emails; not in product UI; not in notification subjects.
| Expression | Why It's Forbidden | Preferred Alternative |
|---|---|---|
| ご利用いただきありがとうございます(過剰使用) | Set phrase; in excess reads as template copy, not genuine brand voice. | 文脈に合った具体的な文頭で開始する |
| 貴重なご意見をいただきました | Ultra-formal phrasing inappropriate for SaaS product tone. | フィードバックをありがとうございます |
| 〜させていただく(連続使用) | Grammatically correct but overused as a politeness hedge. Repeated use sounds evasive. | 〜します / 〜いたします を直接使う |
| あなた(B2Bコンテキスト) | Second-person pronoun too informal for B2B contexts. Reads as ad copy, not product communication. | お客様 / ユーザー(サーフェスによる) |
| 是非ご確認ください | Overused instruction phrase. Appears in nearly every CTA across Japanese SaaS products. | 具体的なアクションを記述する(〜を確認できます) |
Japanese uses passive voice for structural reasons that English does not — specifically, to soften directives and to describe processes from the object's perspective as a politeness move. This makes the passive-vs-active decision in Japanese brand copy more nuanced than its English equivalent.
The practical rule for most SaaS brands is: use active voice in product UI (button labels, success messages, instructional copy) and in marketing copy where the brand wants to signal confidence and clarity. Use passive in situations where the brand is reporting on a process that happened to the user's data or account (データが処理されました — the data was processed — rather than システムがデータを処理しました — the system processed the data).
The exception is error messages and warnings, where passive voice is often the appropriate choice because it describes what happened without implying user error: ファイルを読み込めませんでした (the file could not be loaded) is more neutral than システムがファイルを読み込めませんでした (the system could not load the file).
Japanese avoids explicit second-person pronouns far more than English — good Japanese copy often omits the subject entirely, relying on context. When a second-person reference is necessary, the choice among あなた, お客様, 御社, and ユーザー is not a preference but a register decision, and each carries different social meaning.
The brand voice guide should map second-person address to surface type:
A Japanese brand voice guide should be a working document, not a reference document. Working means it is short enough to be read and remembered, structured with tables and examples rather than paragraphs, and versioned so changes are traceable. The recommended structure:
The review process should involve at minimum one native Japanese speaker who is a professional writer or senior localization reviewer — not just a fluent speaker — because the guide is making style decisions, not correctness decisions, and the distinction requires a trained editorial eye. The guide should be reviewed after every major product update and after any marketing campaign that produced localization requiring judgment calls not covered by the existing rules.
A brand voice audit reviews your existing Japanese copy across surfaces, identifies register inconsistencies, and produces a draft specification for the dimensions your current style documentation is missing. Most SaaS products need at minimum an honorific level specification and a term list before their next translation round.
Request a Brand Voice AuditWhat must a Japanese brand voice guide contain that an English style guide doesn't?
A Japanese brand voice guide must specify the honorific level (which position on the です/ます spectrum the brand occupies), the script choice policy (rules for when a term is written in kanji, katakana, or hiragana), sentence-final form rules (does the brand end sentences with plain forms, polite forms, or nominalizations), and punctuation rules specific to Japanese typography (。vs period, 「」 vs "", ・ as bullet separator). English style guides address none of these because English does not have grammatical honorific levels, script choices, or a sentence-final form system.
How do you specify the honorific level precisely in a Japanese style guide?
Rather than describing the level abstractly (polite but not too formal), specify it with concrete sentence-final examples. A useful shorthand is to name the spectrum position: accessible-professional means です/ます endings, no でございます, no 貴社, お客様 rather than あなた, active constructions preferred. Include three or four sample sentences at the correct level and three or four that are too formal and too casual, so translators can calibrate against real examples rather than abstract descriptors.
Should borrowed technical terms use katakana or their Japanese equivalents?
The answer depends on the term and the audience. For a B2B SaaS audience familiar with technical vocabulary, katakana terms (ダッシュボード, ワークフロー, オートメーション) are preferred over forced Japanese equivalents (制御盤, 作業流れ, 自動化) because the katakana forms are what users encounter in every other SaaS product they use. The style guide should list each key term explicitly: approve the katakana form, disapprove the forced kanji equivalent, and note any terms where the Japanese equivalent is the industry standard (設定 rather than セッティング).
How do you handle the word "you" in Japanese brand copy?
Japanese brand copy avoids explicit second-person pronouns far more than English. The choice among あなた (neutral), お客様 (respectful customer), 御社 (formal company), and ユーザー (user) depends on context and surface: お客様 in marketing and onboarding, ユーザー or the person's name in product UI, 御社 in formal sales or contract documents. The most important rule: avoid あなた in formal B2B copy — it is grammatically correct but socially informal, equivalent to using first names with someone you have just met. The style guide should specify each surface and its appropriate second-person treatment.
What is the recommended sentence length for Japanese brand copy?
Japanese brand copy reads best at 40–60 characters per sentence. Below 30 characters, sentences feel choppy and telegraphic. Above 70 characters, sentences accumulate subordinate clauses that make the predicate wait too long and the sentence harder to parse. The 40–60 character target is a guideline, not a rule — long sentences are correct when the content genuinely requires them. The style guide should document the target and include examples of compliant and non-compliant sentences, so translators and reviewers can calibrate without counting characters for every sentence.
Register inconsistency across translators, tools, and surfaces is the most common quality problem in Japanese SaaS localization — and the most preventable. A brand voice audit identifies the gaps and produces the specification your team needs.