@Rick I see your point, but think you may be misunderstanding the “styling language” terminology.
Styling language refers to the actual design of the vehicle, not the literal “language” that’s meant to describe it in the media or in writing (or otherwise). A styling language is a set of physical and defining characteristics that define the styling/design of a vehicle.
For instance, the styling (design) language of modern BMWs, known as Flame Surfacing, is characterized by three-dimensional pressing of a body panel from a single press for multiple curves, which before necessitated several pressings or was done by hand.
The Flame Surfacing language translates “to the pavement” in what you see from BMW today — multiple bends/shapes in the body panels that flow together; that’s the design practice… a design implementation if you will, even an ideal — in some cases. It’s what makes the styling of all BMWs common to BMW.
In Chevys, for instance, it’s the dual-port grille, the swept-back wraparound headlamps, and the dual-cockpit layout of the interior — among other things — found in the Cruze, Malibu, Equinox, and Traverse. It’s the unification of a family of vehicles via design.
The Camaro, by contrast, breaks that design language by containing more “retro” design cues — thus having a retro design language. Even so, some of those styling elements were carried over to the new Malibu in the tail lamps and interior instrumentation.
So to wrap up that good ol’ monologue, a styling language has little to do with what’s seen in the media or talked about by people. It’s what designers use to define the looks of vehicles and associate a family/line of vehicles. Hope that makes sense.
