French engagement versus British commitment. Was it interlingual miscommunication or political manipulation?

ABSTRACT

The efforts undertaken to establish the contemporary European Union started many years earlier. The history of establishing a pan-European organization is interesting not only for historians and economists but also translators and linguists as it is the history of interlingual communication (negotiations and agreements). One such negotiation was allegedly ineffective due to the difference in understanding the French term engagement and its English equivalent employed by translators and interpreters, that is to say the English term commitment. The authors aim at presenting the political background of negotiations and the social semiotic analysis of the terms in question in order to provoke the reader to find the answer to the question whether the negotiation was broken due to interlingual miscommunication resulting from erroneously chosen equivalent or it was destined to failure from the very beginning due to socio-political and economic interests of negotiating parties. In order to achieve that goal, the authors have analysed notes exchanged between the governments of France and Great Britain in course of negotiation. The history of negotiation and the linguistic analysis are combined to illustrate the complexity of meaning construction and the semiotic implications of the contextual dependence of meanings of terms and their dynamic evolution in time and space.     

Legal and LSP Linguistics and Translation: Asian Languages’ Perspectives

International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique - This essay opens the Special Issue of the International Journal for the Semiotics of Law...