Planification and Comitology
Glen Newey
In February the German president, Joachim Gauck, called for English to be adopted as the official EU language, partly to make the UK feel more loved now that David Cameron’s committed himself to an in-out referendum. Another candidate might be Latin, Europe’s lingua franca for over a millennium, but the ancient Romans are not thinking of leaving the union. This has its serious side, as the EU’s 23 languages (to become 24 when Croatia joins) contribute to a democratic defici; as with Belgium, in some ways the EU in microcosm, failure of accountability is often put down to the lack of a common language.
Gauck’s suggestion predictably pissed off the French. At an early meeting of the European Political Science consortium in the 1970s, when the president began his address in English, the French delegation walked out. But there’s less for the French to be annoyed about this time than they might think. Eurenglish is already well established in the EU. Germans, for example, are good at inventing English-looking words that the English themselves never use, as in: ‘Dear Clients! Please switch out your Handys in the Wellness-Gym!’ My French-language version of Word offers to check my spelling against not only the usual ex-colonial versions of English, but also ‘EU English’. In some of the most egregious examples of Eurenglish, readers confront the textual equivalent of Gérard Depardieu kitted out with a token bowler and brolly.
The process is sufficiently far-advanced for the EU, in a characteristic bout of autophagy, to have issued guidelines for de-Eurifying its prose. Among the monstrosities its author, Jeremy Gardner, targets is the patently gallic ‘planification’, for English ‘planning’ – and doubtless before long, if not already, the back-formed ‘planify’. The by-blow of a world of indefinitely prolonged bureaucratic foreplay, ‘planification’ suggests that anything so vulgarly concrete as a plan itself requires planning, which in turn calls for a pilot project, preceded by a feasibility study.... Similarly ‘in frame of’ (dans le cadre de), ‘delay’ to mean ‘deadline’ (délai), ‘eventual’ to mean ‘possible’ (éventuel) and ‘reflection group’ (groupe de réflexion), whose English meaning the dictionary gives as ‘a discrete group which is generated by a set of reflections of a finite-dimensional Euclidean space’.
Turning Eurenglish back into sense feels a bit like the Laputan project of reducing human excrement to its original food. Some words are just made up. A case in point is ‘comitology’ which, as Gardner notes, doesn’t exist outside the EU and ‘is formed from a misspelt stem (committee has two “m”s and two “t”s)’. The word seems to mean something like ‘the study of committees’ and ‘the structure of committees set up by the EU to review its own legislation’.
With such langue de bois no wonder everyone’s confused. Take for example the phrase ‘budget line’, apparently widespread in EU texts, which Gardner says ‘does not exist in English’. He goes on to note that there is no agreement about what ‘budget line’ means anyway. Maybe this goes some way to explaining why auditors fail to sign off the EU’s accounts.
Comments
My President has decided that "strive" can be a noun. So it is now his strive to get it accepted in English English. If he doesn't succeed, maybe his strive will be to get "strive" into American English, who knows?
There are huge impelling forces requiring English to become the standard form of discourse in peer reviewed journals in my part of the social sciences. Quite rightly, colleague from Brazil, or Poland, or India are pissed off about this cultural hegemony.
As someone who only speaks and writes in English, it seems churlish to complain about it. Yet the consequence is that this generic Gringlish reader (and editor, and reviewer) must be the person for whom one writes. So, now, it has become very difficult to express ideas that require narrative complexity, or to write in ways which embody, and so reveal, some of the contradictions and paradoxes that one is writing about.
Too, often, now, peer-reviewers have tell me, writing themselves in what I can now name as Newey's Eurenglish, that, for example, my writing is not suitable for a general reader; that 'to govern' and 'to alter' are essentially the same; that 'there needs to be one single idea clearly conveyed'. Editors of journals once renowned for publishing complicated narrative accounts of theory now reject papers for containing 'too many ideas'; and insist on a pro-forma structure, with 'contributions' as an introductory section, as if there cannot ever be something worked out by the process of reading, that this very upfront flagging will deny. Never mind the pleasure of a reader working something out for themselves, whether it is a position of agreement or disagreement.
So, as well as there being things in Hindi, or Portuguese, or Polish, which cannot be expressed in English, and therefore do not get expressed, there are too things in English which are now forbidden to be expressed in English - or should we call it Eurenglish, or Gringlish. The New English that is emerging is, in fact a Pidgin, a language naturally spoken by no-one, but invented to enable communication across different native tongues. But because it is so close to English, it pandemic quality remains obscured.
It's not infrequent for me to be at an academic conference where I'm the only native speaker, and as a consequence probably the least well understood. But we have to face up to that and not talk about this new language as if it were a disease. We need a descriptive-cosmopolitan, not a prescriptive-insular grammar.
EXAMPL . A Dictionary Pronunciation Guide is based on the BBC Text Pronunciation Guide, plus 36 very common irregularly-spelled words to lern by rote that make up 12% of everyday text. ( ALL ALMOST ALWAYS AMONG COME SOME COULD SHOULD WOULD HALF KNOW OF OFF ONE ONLY ONCE OTHER PULL PUSH PUT TWO THEIR THEY AS WAS WHAT WANT WHO WHY VERY, and international word endings -ION/-TION/-SION/ZION)
After that, only 6% of surplus letters in words need be cut, and 3% of misleading letters changed, in everyday text,
2011, Yule, Valerie 'Recent developments which affect spelling. On the possibility of removing the unnecessary difficulties in English spelling, while leaving the basic appearance of English print intact.' English Today, 107, vol 27, No 3. Sept 2011, pp 62-67 http://journals.cambridge.org/repo_A839oLF6
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~ozideas/spelling.htm#word Can u spell? The best of us may not be perfect.
1986. The design of spelling to meet needs & abilities. Harvard Educational Review. 56.3. 278 - 297. http://www.hepg.org/her/abstract/489
"Budget line" has a precise meaning over here -- it refers to an item (salary, equipment, supplies, service, etc.) in a budget with the amount of the cost next to it. In proposed public agency budgets (e.g., for the annual budget of the State of New York for the coming fiscal year), the final authority (in this example, the Governor) has the so-called "line-item veto" power, that is, he or she can cross out the line and its associated cost with the stroke of a pen.
But, don't worry, in spite of the clarity of these particular terms, these bureaucratese prospers in the U.S., thriving on vocational jargon, circumlocution, and euphemism.