EU Texts Research Articles

Untangling ideologies in lifelong learning discourse

ABSTRACT This paper contributes to research on lifelong learning (LL) by examining discourses of multilateral organisations through the lens of ‘progressive neoliberalism’, in which contradictory ideologies of social justice movements and capitalism are hybridised (Fraser 2017). LL has been interpreted as a means of upskilling to remain competitive in the global economy or as a device for promoting social cohesion, equality and personal fulfilment. This study locates LL within the context of educating global citizens of all ages to address world crises and aims to understand underlying ideological assumptions in OECD, UNESCO, WB, EU and IB policy texts. A critical discourse analysis reveals the entanglement of largely symbolic progressive language within the confines of neoliberal capitalism. This ambiguous conceptualisation offers an incoherent framework for LL and perpetuates what Gramsci (1971) describes as a hegemonic bloc. Findings suggest that LL discourses mediate contradictions between two diverging ideological orientations, legitimise social hierarchies and power relations, and provide a superficial approach to global injustices and environmental emergencies.

Syntax of European Union Law

The article investigates the significance of syntax in the multilingual EU law. It attempts to respond to the question whether syntax is apt to contribute to the uniformity of that law and how, with regard to this function, it relates to the (widely disputed yet uncontested) semantic and pragmatic methods of achieving such a uniformity. In order to respond to this question, the article firstly, recalls fundamental concepts which would help conceptualize the endeavour and, secondly, presents examples of analysis of syntax arrangements which can be deemed representative for the study of the said problem of contribution. The study finds that EU law (expressed in 24 official languages which have equal authentic status) relies on diversified syntax of its respective constitutive languages. Syntax structures used in respective language versions of EU law represent narrower, law-specific, form of syntax structures available in these languages. Its specificity is determined mostly by legislative traditions of respective EU member states. Syntactic structures of EU law produced in different official languages do not represent a single pattern because of diversified mode of producing illocutionary value of provisions in which strongly idiomatic modal verbs (modal operators) and even special modal structures (not necessarily containing modal verbs) are used to express legal norms. They also differ when it comes to their law-specific compositionality, i.e. flexibility of different syntax structure to produce the same meaning and, in the same time, to preserve their genre/register informational value. Notwithstanding, these structures have well pronounced and system-significant common features within respective Germanic, Romanic, and Slavic families of languages in which EU law is mostly reproduced. The sentence structure and the relevant register of EU law provisions are the same for respective versions of EU texts of law expressed in the languages belonging to the respective three language families which were examined for the sake of this study. These common features are re-enforced by the synoptic mode of producing EU law which imposes formal resemblance of provisions reproduced in respective EU official languages to each other. The multilingual EU legislator also uses patterns which grant legal text the relevant register, yet its specific EU character ultimately transpires through semantic aspects of EU texts rather than their mere syntax. The unity of the system is achieved most strongly through the EU specific interpretation, where the teleological methods (which can be conceived as a language means to achieve EU law goals and objectives at the pragmatic level) are of utmost importance. Thus, there is no EU-specific syntax which would, as such, contribute to unity of EU law. Instead, unity is achieved in the area of semantics and pragmatics. The well exposed anaphoric character of EU law (as any other type of law) may contribute to narrowing down possibility for differentiation of respective language versions of EU law.

Languages and multilingualism on the European agenda: European Schools as a case study

ABSTRACT This paper focuses on the language policy of the European Union (hereafter, EU), which is applied in the case of European Schools (hereafter, ES). It is based on a case study conducted at postgraduate level. Our purposes were: a) to examine and analyse the official EU policy on language and multilingualism, b) to find similarities and differences between the official EU texts and the praxis followed in ES regarding language learning, and c) to explore the perceptions of ES teachers, emphasizing on the effectiveness of this model as far as language learning and multilingualism are concerned. The results of this study have shown that European Schools are considered effective in terms of teaching students their mother tongue while promoting foreign language acquisition. Moreover, certain measures and necessary changes are being discussed in order to have similar multilingual and multicultural school systems developed in modern societies.

A Deeper Look into the EU Text and Data Mining Exceptions: Harmonisation, Data Ownership, and the Future of Technology

Abstract This paper focuses on the two exceptions for text and data mining (TDM) introduced in the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (CDSM). While both are mandatory for Member States, Art. 3 is also imperative and finds application in cases of text and data mining for the purpose of scientific research by research and cultural institutions; Art. 4, on the other hand, permits text and data mining by anyone but with rightholders able to ‘contract-out’ (Art. 4). We trace the context of using the lever of copyright law to enable emerging technologies such as AI and the support innovation. Within the EU copyright intervention, elements that may underpin a transparent legal framework for AI are identified, such as the possibility of retention of permanent copies for further verification. On the other hand, we identify several pitfalls, including an excessively broad definition of TDM which makes the entire field of data-driven AI development dependent on an exception. We analyse the implications of limiting the scope of the exceptions to the right of reproduction; we argue that the limitation of Art. 3 to certain beneficiaries remains problematic; and that the requirement of lawful access is difficult to operationalize. In conclusion, we argue that there should be no need for a TDM exception for the act of extracting informational value from protected works. The EU’s CDSM provisions paradoxically may favour the development of biased AI systems due to price and accessibility conditions for training data that offer the wrong incentives. To avoid licensing, it may be economically attractive for EU-based developers to train their algorithms on older, less accurate, biased data, or import AI models already trained abroad on unverifiable data.

Sexist drafting and translation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU

The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (adopted in 2000 and legally binding since 2009) was the object of criticism during its process of drafting, among other issues, on gender grounds for the use of sexist language, the lack of gender mainstreaming, and not having a clearer stance on the support of equality between women and men. This article lists the main amendments that were submitted in this respect. The final version of the Charter was modified to eliminate sexist language in the original English text but not in other language versions, as we will see in the analysis. Based on the European Institute for Gender Equality’s definition of non-sexist use of language as the avoidance of ambiguous masculine gender, we will highlight the appearance of so-called generic masculine in the Charter’s versions in English, Spanish, French, Italian and Portuguese. Finally, a proposal of non-sexist Spanish translation is included with the hope to demonstrate the functional adequacy, simplicity and need to implement non-sexist translation and drafting of an EU text.

European Colonial Pasts and the EU’s Democracy-promoting Present: Silences and Continuities

ABSTRACT How is EU democracy promotion made compatible with European colonial powers’ recent history of quashing democratic and human rights? A discourse analysis of general programmatic EU statements and texts related to selected salient historic junctures – the Algerian Hirak, the 2018 Democratic Republic of Congo elections and the Arab Uprisings – reveals that EU policy-makers reconcile the colonial past and the democracy-promoting present mostly through a silencing of colonialism. The consequence is that colonial-time hierarchical discourses are left undisturbed. Moreover, the projection of peace, democracy and the rule of law becomes not only the oft-noted break with the past, but also a continuity with colonial discourses of Europeans as ‘democratic’, ‘humanitarian’ and ‘civilised’.

Horizontal and vertical terminology work in the context of EU translations

The aim of this paper is to analyse the decisions the translator has to take while translating terminology in EU texts. Starting with the theoretical aspects, the interrelation of terminology and translation will be explored – leading to the reinterpretation of some key terms in both disciplines: the notion of term in a translation-oriented perspective, and the notion of translation in a terminology-oriented perspective. Second, turning to the EU context, a short overview will be given of the peculiarities of the EU’s language regime and its impact on the role of translators as terminologists. Third, it will be revealed how the interconnection of conceptual systems and languages at EU level makes terminology work a multi-layered activity, with a number of decisions to be taken by the translator. Two terms, horizontal and vertical terminology work, will be introduced to label these activities. Special attention will be paid to the notion of EU term. It will be argued that the emergence of a special EU-language and terminology and the limits of corpus planning at national level make the involvement of Member States especially relevant in this context.

Degrees of Linguistic and Cultural Mediation in Legal Translation

Abstract The interconnection between language, culture and ethics is a commonplace within the field of translation studies, more particularly, when discussing legal translation. The role of the translator as a communicator and cultural mediator has long been established. However, the question arises how far the legal translator of EU texts can and is entitled to mediate between legal systems and cultures.

The role of context and relevance in translating European Union texts

The article presents the nature and legitimacy of translation studies; it examines the function of a translator, its role during the translation process and the generated linguistic product from the point of view of cognitive pragmatics. In the present study we are looking for the answer to what factors influence the translator in his/her activity, what aspects he/she keeps in mind, how relevance theory prevails in translation, what role the current context, target audience and readers’ prior knowledge have in interpreting the translated text. In order to answer the questions, in the first part we summarize the opinions published in the literature, then we examine our hypothesis with the method of structural discourse analysis in relation to three languages (English, German, Hungarian) in EU texts, according to which, despite the European Union’s language policy aspirations, similarities and differences can be noticed depending on what the translator considered relevant to highlight. In the examined texts we can find formal, semantic and pragmatic differences according to the levels of identity. In the course of the analysis, we have made an attempt to highlight the semantic and pragmatic similarities and the differences between the versions, the factors which may cause them, and also their connection with the cognitive context, relevance and the general context. As a first step, we identified the different parts of the texts, and then the reason for the differences was revealed during the analysis. The aim is therefore to support our hypothesis and to illustrate with linguistic examples that context and relevance are central to translation.

A deeper look into the EU Text and Data Mining exceptions: Harmonisation, data ownership, and the future of technology

A deeper look into the EU Text and Data Mining exceptions: Harmonisation, data ownership, and the future of technology

A critical discourse analysis of cases of ELF reformulation of European and Italian legal texts on migration

The present chapter focuses on a parallel corpus of legal texts from the EU and the recently issued Italian legal text dealing with Migration, the so called “Decreto Sicurezza bis” (“Safety Decree”), of June 2019, and it aims to point out the textual difficulties arising from the interpretation of such legal documents. This is all the more true if we think of the technical limitations and practical difficulties that reading a legal text may pose to a layperson using English as a lingua franca (ELF). Unlike previous studies dealing with the same topic of Immigration (Provenzano 2008), here the focus is on a small corpus from the EU and an Italian text, with the aim of defining cultural similarities at the level of text production. Furthermore, the texts are also relevant to the receivers and, yet, they are often likely to cause unintelligibility. Hence, both the EU texts and the Italian one are here submitted to a process of reformulation, as preliminary to the translation stage, in order to make them more accessible to international receivers (Widdowson 1984).

How much Labour Law is there in an EU Labour-Law Directive? Labour Law and Road Transport Terminology in Directive 2002/15/EC

The paper discusses the terminology used in an EU document. It is part of a recently started research project on labour law terminology and terminography. Directive 2002/15/EC, the document selected for analysis, is an example of EU text dealing with two subject fields: labour law and road transport. Apart from that, it presents specialised vocabulary typical of EU documents. Analysing this directive enabled the author to compile a record of terms in the three fields: labour law, road transport law, and EU legislation, and then analyse them according to several classifications: the field of study, the type of concepts represented, and the length of terms (the number of words, a formal criterion). The proportions calculated made it possible to draw some conclusions as to the specialised vocabulary found in EU legal texts from the viewpoint of a translator and a terminologist, who need to be familiar with all the topics discussed in texts they are dealing with in a given job.

Legal-Linguistic Profiling in Institutional Contexts: The Case of EU Staff Representation Bodies

Abstract This paper applies a structured legal-linguistic profiling approach to EU “staff representation bodies” as a way to access domains that lie behind the public face of EU institutions and their texts concerning translation, language and terminology. The study commences with a legal-linguistic analysis of EU texts for references to “staff”, “staff representation” and “employment” in order to identify specific texts and bodies of relevance to the study. This approach leads to two broad categories: staff committees and trade unions. Information is sought from EU institutions about these bodies and their translation and language arrangements, and a list is made of websites available to the general public. These sites are then examined as part of the legal-linguistic profiling approach.

When Does GDPR Act as a Blocking Statute: The Relevance of a Lawful Basis for Transfer

This paper addresses an important practical topic – when does the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) act as a “blocking statute,” to prohibit transfers of personal data in response to requests by non-EU law enforcement agencies? Since the GDPR went into effect in 2018, there has been considerable discussion of this issue, most notably when there is a request from US law enforcement for emails and other records held by cloud service providers. This paper builds upon Theodore Christakis’ recent article on the effects of Article 48 and 49 of GDPR on when the GDPR acts as a blocking statute. This paper expands the discussion by addressing the full set of GDPR legal provisions that govern such transfers of personal data from the EU to a non-member country, including the lawful bases for transfer under Articles 45 and 46 of GDPR. This paper concludes, in certain circumstances, that there is a “lawful basis” for transferring personal data out of the EU, without a blockage by Article 48. This article examines the text and legislative history of the GDPR, and provides an overall interpretation that is consistent with all of the GDPR provisions that govern such cross-border transfers. The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) and European Data Protection Board (EDPB), by contrast, omitted any analysis of GDPR Articles 45 and 46 from their “initial legal assessment” of these issues. Part 1 of this paper presents the relevant EU and US legal texts. Part 2 explains why a US court order would be effective on a company headquartered in the US when the data is already in the US. Part 3 presents insights from the legislative history of Article 48. The GDPR narrowed the earlier proposed version of the blocking provision in at least five respects. Part 4 explains one significant blocking effect that does exist under Article 48 as adopted – where there is no pre-existing lawful basis for transfer, then Article 48 clearly acts as a blocking statute. Part 5 provides a 2x2 table that summarizes the legal conclusions. Overall, the paper supports the conclusion that Article 48 likely blocks in situations where there is a lawful basis for transfer but the data is in the EU. By contrast, there are strong reasons why Article 48 does not block when there is a lawful basis for transfer but the data is in the US, including the lack of extra-territoriality when a US court orders a US company to produce evidence held in the US. Part 6 examines a separate piece of the EDPS/EDPB initial legal assessment, concerning GDPR Article 6. That legal assessment took a surprisingly narrow view of what constitutes legal processing under GDPR with respect to transfers to third countries. The discussion here queries whether this narrow view is consistent with Article 6. In sum, overall, the GDPR has a narrower blocking effect than prior analysis have suggested.

Human security in EU strategy: reflecting on the experience of EUPM in Bosnia and Herzegovina and EULEX in Kosovo

ABSTRACTIn the early 2000s, the EU incrementally appeared to have espoused a distinguishing human security discourse. This was bound not only to inform its crisis management operations but also to shape its global role. Today, the Union seems to move toward a global strategy blueprint and an ensuing public discourse. Human security is no longer mentioned as a grand objective, though it has not been moved to the background. It is cited as an end of one just component of EU global strategy. This article tries to map out how relevant EU texts speak about human security and highlights benchmarks in the cases of the European Union Police Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo. By focusing on the mandate and effects of these civilian missions, it finds that the Union has refrained from operationalising a human security perspective to direct them. Although it has not taken steps to internalize and turn human security into an overarching driver of its engagement, elements of human security advancement might be recorded.

An EU text and data mining exception for the few: would it make sense?

In the age of Big Data the value of data does not lie in data or text considered in their isolation, but rather in the extraction of such value. This requires that text and data be analyzed, to thus enable the discovery of new patterns and relations. While a task of this kind would be virtually impossible to perform manually, text and data mining (TDM) techniques allow it easily. In 2016 the EU Commission issued a proposal for a Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (DSM Directive) which, among other things, includes a new mandatory exception allowing research organizations to make reproductions and extractions in order to carry out TDM of works or other subject-matter...

Strategies and Outcomes in Translating Industrial Relations Concepts in EU Texts

AbstractDrawing on the examination of a national-specific industrial relations practice – Italy’sammortizzatori sociali– this paper intends to provide an analysis of the strategies put in place by translators at the European Union to render peculiar concepts in English in official texts and to evaluate the translation process outcome in terms of effectiveness and clarity of meaning. To this purpose, a corpus of documents has been scrutinised that have been produced in Italian and then translated into English containing the expressionammortizzatori sociali. The findings of the analysis show that different approaches have been used by EU translators to render this notion which give rise to distinct outcomes as far as translation equivalence and faithfulness are concerned.

Ideological shifts between bilingual EU texts

Abstract This article examines the translation of an official English European Council text, namely a Commission Communication, into Greek. A critical discourse analysis-based methodology is used to probe the manipulation of ideological shifts between the English source text and its Greek translation. The analysis of both texts aims to shed light on the way culturally-approved patterns reflect and also influence society’s priorities and preoccupations. The comparative analysis provides an example of how the European Union and its official working language influenced the translator’s attitudes and motivations in decoding various ideological patterns. Adopting a social view of political ideologies and their associated readerships, the article discusses how discourse and ideology mediate in the translation of the English-Greek language pair. It shows how discourse reinforces ideological assumptions and how it challenges them by emphasizing that the source culture violates the very norms and values the target culture holds dear.

Competition Law: Dominant Position and Its Abuse: Abuse of Dominant Position in US and EU

The concept of abuse of dominant position in US and EU has some basic differences and it is interesting to note that the competition law in India has seen a shift from more reliance on EU than US in dealing with abuse of dominance cases. This is quite evident from the fact that the concept of ‘monopolistic trade practices’ under the MRTP Act was more near to US law of ‘monopolisation’ while the concept of ‘abuse of dominance’ under the Competition Act is more nearer to the EU text in Article 102 which prohibits abuse of a dominant position. While there is a basic distinction in enforcement approach in EU and US, i.e. in US, there is a criminal enforcement of anti-trust laws while in EU it is administrative. India has followed the administrative model in EU.

A HYBRID TRANSLATION THEORY FOR EU TEXTS

EU texts are produced by way of multilingual negotiation in a supranational multicultural discourse community, where there is no linguistically neutral ground and where the internationalisation of concepts and ideas is a sine qua non. As a result, they are idiosyncratic texts, reflecting specific textual features. Their translation in the current 23 official EU languages is equally idiosyncratic and challenging, to say the least, especially since it is shaped under the EU’s overwhelming cultural and linguistic diversity, the constraints of its policy of multilingualism, and the subsequent policy of linguistic equality which states that all languages are equal, or ‘equally authentic’ (Wagner, Bech, Martinez 2002, 7), and that translations are not really translations but language versions. In other words, in the framework of EU translation, the terms source text (ST) and target text (TT) cease to exist, while the prima facie illusory notion of ‘equivalence’ seems to resurface—though altered in nature—and dominate the translation practice. It thus goes without saying that in the case of EU texts and their translation a tailor-made theoretical framework is required where many classic concepts of Translation Studies (TS), such as ST, TT and equivalence need to be re-evaluated and redefined, and at the same time functionalist approaches and the postmodernist concepts of intertextuality, hybridity and in-betweenness need to come to the fore. The proposed translation theory for EU texts flaunts the feature inherent in their production, it is—just like them—hybrid.