DO Newsletter: January/February Issue 2009

Bart Defrancq:
Linguist, expert of EU terminology
Bart Defrancq has worked for the Development Office for more than ten years hosting tailor-made seminars on EU terminology for groups of professionals and workshops on terminology management for officials of the European institutions.

What does a participant learn in your EU terminology seminar?

First of all, the participants learn what the terms are about. Translators and lawyers look in glossaries, where they find the translation of the EU terms but not the meaning. I try to present the terminology in a systematic way by comparing the meanings of different terms that are similar to each other.

Could you give an example?

Let’s take the terms ‘policy’ and ‘common policy’. I explain to them that common policies include at least one area where the EU holds exclusive competence. This is not the case for policies. The exception is the Common Foreign and Security Policy, as the EU does not have exclusive competences in this area.

What else do you teach the participants?

I also want to make the participants aware that EU terminology is sometimes about creating terms which are fashionable. For example, the Common Foreign and Security Policy is not a common policy, but it’s called like that in order to make it more attractive and prestigious. So, my seminars also include a critical assessment of how and why certain terminologies are used.

Who defines EU terminology?

A considerable number of important terms are used for the first time by politicians in agreements, which usually constitute a compromise. The effort to reach a compromise is often reflected in vague and abstract terminology. If there is a problem with the interpretation of the terms, it has to be interpreted by the European Court of Justice. So this institution is mainly defining EU terminology. In ordinary day-to-day legislation, terms tend more and more to be defined in a provision which is specifically dedicated to definitions. The room for manoeuvre the judges have is much more limited in this case.

Has the EU terminology evolved in the last years?

Yes, definitely. Terminology evolved with the deepening and widening processes of the EU. The whole range of external relations is a very creative area in terms of terminology. Another example is development policy. The internal market used to be an evolving area until it was completed.

What is so special about EU terminology? In how far is it different from national political vocabulary?

It is different because it often reflects the will of the negotiators to avoid national terminology. EU law has to be applied uniformly, so EU terms should not be interpreted in a national way. Secondly, for a number of Member States, national terms would suggest that the EU is something like a state – and this is not what they want. This is also the reason why all the constitutional vocabulary like ‘constitution’, ‘minister’ or ‘law’ has been removed since the Constitutional Treaty was replaced by the Lisbon Treaty. EU terminology also contains more compromises than national terminologies: there is more vagueness, which is reflected in terms like ‘open method of coordination’.

What is the biggest difficulty for translators regarding EU terminology?

I think it’s the meaning. Especially for translators that live in countries that are not EU Members States, because they lack the whole conceptual system of EU law. And even if they know the term and have their own equivalents, they don’t understand the complete meaning.

Who is participating in the EU terminology seminars?

Especially participants from non-EU Member States – for example, Russia, Turkey or Azerbaijan. I have also been to Bulgaria, Slovenia, Poland and Latvia. In most cases, these trainings are part of an effort to support the translators who are in charge of translating the acquis communautaire as a step in the accession process. In addition, I regularly hold workshops for officials of the EU institutions on terminology management.

Are there mainly translators among the participants?

Yes, but some of them are also lawyers.

These seminars have been very successful. What is your recipe?

I think the participants appreciate that I am a linguist, not a lawyer, so I know what their needs as translators are. Most people also like the systematic presentation of terminology, where they learn more about the differences and difficulties. And then they seem to like my critical approach. I try to show the participants that a lot of ‘political marketing’ is done – the EU institutions create terms that sound good. The participants realise that the EU is not so different from national governments.

When is the next seminar?

There will be one seminar at the Council of the European Union which is scheduled to take place later this year.

Thank you very much.

The interview was held by Cordula Singer on 30 January 2009.