Lost in Translation: Writing treaties in two languages can lead to problems
1–10 of 46 posts
Re: Lost in Translation: Writing treaties in two languages can lead to problems
#2A prominent example of this is the Treaty establishing the European Union where every single one of the 20+ language versions is "Canon" and has to be used by the European Court of Justice. There are often judgements with paragraphs devoted to figuring out the hidden differences between certain wordings in different languages. Interestingly this can lead to problems but sometimes it also clears things up if one language is more precise than the others.
Re: Lost in Translation: Writing treaties in two languages can lead to problems
#3This seems like a solved problem: agree at the time which translation takes precedence in the event of a dispute. Use a third language (historically French was the language of diplomacy, now English, but for modern treaties you could pick any major world language) if, as is likely, neither side likes the idea of the binding version being in the other side's language.
The same problem has to be solved in countries with more than one official language. In Ireland, the Irish-language version of a law takes precedence. This is a little awkward in theory since parliamentarians, civil servants, judges and lawyers overwhelmingly do not speak Irish to a sufficient level to draft, debate or interpret the law, and laws often exist for years before anyone gets around to translating them and thereby creating the "definitive version". But in practice, the legal system generally works.
Re: Lost in Translation: Writing treaties in two languages can lead to problems
#4> In the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 242, the French text instructed Israel to withdraw from ‘des territoires’ (the territories) it occupied during the 1967 Six-Day War. The English text, however, merely read ‘territories’, removing the definite article and thus leaving ambiguous how much territory Israel should cede.
This is inaccurate. « Des territoires » would be more accurately translated as 'some territories' or just 'territories', the author is thinking of « les territoires ».
Re: Lost in Translation: Writing treaties in two languages can lead to problems
#5> In the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 242, the French text instructed Israel to withdraw from ‘des territoires’ (the territories) it occupied during the 1967 Six-Day War. The English text, however, merely read ‘territories’, removing the definite article and thus leaving ambiguous how much territory Israel should cede. This is inaccurate. « Des territoires » would be more accurately translated as…
That is wrong. The french version stated:
> Retrait des forces armées israéliennes des territoires occupés lors du récent conflit.
In this context, "des" means "de les". It is indeed a definite article.
Re: Lost in Translation: Writing treaties in two languages can lead to problems
#6> In the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 242, the French text instructed Israel to withdraw from ‘des territoires’ (the territories) it occupied during the 1967 Six-Day War. The English text, however, merely read ‘territories’, removing the definite article and thus leaving ambiguous how much territory Israel should cede. This is inaccurate. « Des territoires » would be more accurately translated as…
That is wrong. The french version stated: > Retrait des forces armées israéliennes des territoires occupés lors du récent conflit. In this context, "des" means "de les". It is indeed a definite article.
With context it is clear. But the way the author takes « des territoires » out of context, makes it look like it's the indefinite article. They should have translated it to 'of the territories'.
Re: Lost in Translation: Writing treaties in two languages can lead to problems
#7A prominent example of this is the Treaty establishing the European Union where every single one of the 20+ language versions is "Canon" and has to be used by the European Court of Justice. There are often judgements with paragraphs devoted to figuring out the hidden differences between certain wordings in different languages. Interestingly this can lead to problems but sometimes it also clears things up if one langu…
Interesting, can you link to some examples? I've read a few ECJ judgements in some high-profile cases, and I've never seen this.
Re: Lost in Translation: Writing treaties in two languages can lead to problems
#8> In the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 242, the French text instructed Israel to withdraw from ‘des territoires’ (the territories) it occupied during the 1967 Six-Day War. The English text, however, merely read ‘territories’, removing the definite article and thus leaving ambiguous how much territory Israel should cede. This is inaccurate. « Des territoires » would be more accurately translated as…
That is wrong. The french version stated: > Retrait des forces armées israéliennes des territoires occupés lors du récent conflit. In this context, "des" means "de les". It is indeed a definite article.
Isn't it ambiguous? I would translate "withdraw from territories" and "withdraw from the territories" the same way (edit: so does Google Translate). It's a failure by the translator who should have worded it "retrait...de tous les territoires" or "retrait...de certaines territoires" (withdrawal from all, or some of the territories) as appropriate.
It's clear in the context of a good-faith negotiation that Israel wasn't being given the option to withdraw from one square metre and keep the rest. But the language gives some plausible deniability to their supporters.
Re: Lost in Translation: Writing treaties in two languages can lead to problems
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is wrong. The french version stated: > Retrait des forces armées israéliennes des territoires occupés lors du récent conflit. In this context, "des" means "de les". It is indeed a definite article.
With context it is clear. But the way the author takes « des territoires » out of context, makes it look like it's the indefinite article. They should have translated it to 'of the territories'.
Why not just concede that you were wrong? Even if, yes, the author could have made it a bit more difficult for you to be wrong?
Re: Lost in Translation: Writing treaties in two languages can lead to problems
#10Made me think of the TNG episode with the Sheliak.