ProZ.com Translation Forums

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | EU English more from drafting in English than translation

David Sirett — Fri, 25 Nov 2005 20:27:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: David Sirett
Post title: EU English more from drafting in English than translation

[quote]Lia Fail wrote:

...for their contributions.

One thing that has been overlooked in what has become a 3-way discussion between US-UK-EU English, is that EU English is 'translated English'. All official texts of the EU, as far as I'm aware - or most of them - are drafted in French first, and maybe the reason we have odd-sounding EU English is often a result of trying to fit English to French, often requiring the 'invention' of a 'neologism'...

:-)

Ailish[/quote]

Your awareness appears to be mistaken, 60% of Commission documents, for example, are written in English (see [url removed] ).

Odd-sounding EU English is mainly generated by non-native speakers writing in English, rather than translators (though the latter have their own problems and compromises, of course).

Regards
David

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | "trying to fit" English to X language

RHELLER — Wed, 23 Nov 2005 15:58:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: RHELLER
Post title: "trying to fit" English to X language

Lia said, "All official texts of the EU, as far as I'm aware - or most of them - are drafted in French first, and maybe the reason we have odd-sounding EU English is often a result of trying to fit English to French, often requiring the 'invention' of a 'neologism'..."
-------------------------------------------------------------
To all native speakers: Do the translations you provide sound like you are "trying to fit English to French (or substitute X language)"?

If the translation does not sound like a native speaker (from any English-speaking country) wrote it, then, IMO, it is not a good translation. I know a lot of people do not agree with me on that. I also know that compromise is essential and it is not simple to please that many countries.

The most serious potential problem with long-term consequences is that the EU may sometimes end up with text that no one "really" understands, very " peu pres". Does any nationality really feel comfortable with EU English? Creating a standard that is not 100% understood is not a very good benchmark and would never stand up to ISO standards.

I am not a member of the EU, so Europeans may think that I should stay out of the discussion. However, in the interest of improving/retaining communication during future globalization, U.S. English must be taken into account.

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | thanks all:-)

Lia Fail (X) — Wed, 23 Nov 2005 15:40:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Lia Fail (X)
Post title: thanks all:-)

...for their contributions.

One thing that has been overlooked in what has become a 3-way discussion between US-UK-EU English, is that EU English is 'translated English'. All official texts of the EU, as far as I'm aware - or most of them - are drafted in French first, and maybe the reason we have odd-sounding EU English is often a result of trying to fit English to French, often requiring the 'invention' of a 'neologism'...

:-)

Ailish

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | One of my favorites (oops... favourites)

Wouter van Kampen — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 21:24:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Wouter van Kampen
Post title: One of my favorites (oops... favourites)

There is no match for British upper middle-class humor.

:)

[quote]Katherine Mrignac wrote:

"It was generally agreed upon that ..... thus calling for a more unveiling approach of the institutions established up to date."

= We need more money in order to hire more consultants to write more reports.

Love it - reminds me of 'Yes Minister', with Paul Eddington!![/quote]

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | You do not yet comprehend the true nature of The Machine ;-)

Wouter van Kampen — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 19:12:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Wouter van Kampen
Post title: You do not yet comprehend the true nature of The Machine ;-)

EU guidelines can be ignored, yes.
Until....yes, until they turn up as directives.

:-(

[quote]Andrew Steel MCIL, MITI wrote:

--snip--

By the same token, and like many other EU guidelines, if you do not do any work for EU institutions it can be just as easily ignored.

Andrew[/quote]

[Edited at 2005-11-18 16:57]

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | Very interesting indeed

Wouter van Kampen — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 19:04:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Wouter van Kampen
Post title: Very interesting indeed

Thank you Terry :-)

[quote]Terry Gilman wrote:

From the front matter:

This version of the English Style Guide is dated January 2005. For the latest version, see [url removed]

--snip--
[/quote]

[Edited at 2005-11-17 19:05]

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | Great stuff!

Katherine Mérignac — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 10:19:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Katherine Mérignac
Post title: Great stuff!

"It was generally agreed upon that further intensivations should be anticipated with regard to furthering the issue of sustainability in a more extensive scope focussing on life cycle assessments in different member states throughout the European Union, for which the principles of subsidiarity will be underlined thus calling for a more unveiling approach of the institutions established up to date."

= We need more money in order to hire more consultants to write more reports.

Love it - reminds me of 'Yes Minister', with Paul Eddington!!

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | Re: There's an EU style guide for translators into English

Andrew Steel — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:35:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Andrew Steel
Post title: Re: There's an EU style guide for translators into English

Thank you Terry. That is exactly what I was looking for.

The section on spelling conventions confirms what I had been told informally.

Obviously, in the private sector, the decision on whether to use UK or US English lies with the party contracting the translation, but this EU style guide does support UK usage for the public sector in Europe (unless speakers of US English are specifically targeted and other similar exceptions).

Anyway, returning to Lia's initial question, the fact that the EU indicates that UK English should be used in its communications, and that it has produced a style guide to ensure this goal, does at the very least provide justification for translators who wish to defend their personal use of UK English in Europe.

By the same token, and like many other EU guidelines, if you do not do any work for EU institutions it can be just as easily ignored.

Andrew

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | There's an EU style guide for translators into English

Terry Gilman — Thu, 17 Nov 2005 00:05:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Terry Gilman
Post title: There's an EU style guide for translators into English

From the front matter:

This version of the English Style Guide is dated January 2005. For the latest version, see [url removed]

From an AmE point of view, it is reasonable. Some of the EN translators there are great.

You may also be interested in the following, on "international English" excerpted from a review by Norm Leaper in IABC's "Communication World" magazine:

The Elements of International English Style: A Guide to Writing Correspondence, Reports, Technical Documents and Internet Pages for a Global Audience by Edmond H. Weiss M.E. Sharpe, 2005 184 pages

[...]Author Edmond Weiss notes that while English is the first language of about 400 million people (he calls them E1s), there are more than a billion who speak it as a second language (E2s). "All communication risks misunderstanding," Weiss notes, "and communication between E1s and E2s simply increases those risks."

[...]Also included are such anomalous ideas as substituting longer, more complex words with a single meaning for simpler words with many meanings, and hyphenating normally unhyphenated words to improve comprehension.

[...]Readers reluctant to plunge into uncharted international semantic seas can test the waters by completing an exercise in Appendix 2, "Sentences that Need Editing." In fact, this is not a bad way for a communication manager to introduce his or her staff to some of the more obvious traps.

[...]He notes, for example, that in the U.S., people in business are admired for directness, lack of formality and effective use of time--traits seen in other parts of the world as rude, uncultured, and immature.

Norm Leaper, ABC, IABC Fellow, is president of The Leaper Company, a San Francisco, California-based communication consultancy. He is also a past president of IABC. He can be reached at [email removed] .

On the subject of the forum, it got me thinking about what the EU Default English Police would be like. A Vice Squad for deviant users of commas and hyphens, SWOT teams for incorrigible misspellers (with special rehab for the -ise- -ize- challenged). A BrE Detective Colombo to keep showing up and asking innocent-sounding questions until one's criminal nerves are completely frayed. And received pronunciantion - ?

Otherwise, with Mikhail.

[Edited at 2005-11-17 00:09]

[Edited at 2005-11-17 00:29]

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | An attempt to answer

Wouter van Kampen — Wed, 16 Nov 2005 13:27:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Wouter van Kampen
Post title: An attempt to answer

[quote]Andrew Steel MCIL, MITI wrote:

[quote]Andrew Steel MCIL, MITI wrote:

Firstly, can anyone provide any references to EU English?

"It was generally agreed upon that further intensivations should be anticipated with regard to furthering the issue of sustainability in a more extensive scope focussing on life cycle assessments in different member states throughout the European Union, for which the principles of subsidiarity will be underlined thus calling for a more unveiling approach of the institutions established up to date."

[/quote]

What I really wanted to know was whether a definition of EU English exists (with style guide, etc.), and if there is such a thing, whether it favours UK or US usage.
[/quote]

There is no genuine definition of EU English.

[quote]

I would imagine that as a significant proportion of the texts are produced by the UK,
[/quote]
[quote]
[quote]
This would be in violation off one of the most basic rules of running EU bureaucracy. Do the utmost to maintain the political balance ;-)

[/quote]

Whoops. Nevertheless, as UK representatives make a significant input to many of the texts produced, I would imagine these texts to favour UK English.
[/quote]

[quote]
[quote]
Unfortunately, more and more reports are written directly in a convulated speech in which the original meaning of words is often severely affected by underlying objectives (diplomacy) or a plain lack of thorough comprehension of British English.
[/quote]
[/quote]

[quote]
But does this mean they favour US English?

Andrew[/quote]

No, surely not. Dutch EU consultants, though, tend to use US English expressions, which make things even worse.

BTW the example given is not a real quotation. I merely wrote this little piece to show you what EU English looks like, i.e. invented words, real words used in a context that doesn't fit, long convulated sentences, and a choice of words to impose rather than to convince. There is even a little built-in threat. "It is generally agreed upon..." So don't you dare to differ ;-)

[Edited at 2005-11-16 13:28]

[Edited at 2005-11-16 13:31]

[Edited at 2005-11-16 13:32]

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | Looks like we can all agree on one thing...

Buzzy — Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:23:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Buzzy
Post title: Looks like we can all agree on one thing...

save us from EU English!
which is the language of no identifiable target audience. I suppose it has the advantage of being equally incomprehensible to all. :-)
An illustration of one of the pitfalls of diplomacy and compromise, perhaps - when everybody gets what nobody wants! (and then as Rita points out, it gets onto the web and can be taken as "proof" by the unwary that it's real...)
I wonder if any other language gets messed about in quite the same way...

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | You took the words out of my mouth

RHELLER — Tue, 15 Nov 2005 16:15:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: RHELLER
Post title: You took the words out of my mouth

I was just about to say the same thing, Marie-Helene.

A google search shows that the term "Intensivation" can be found in 1-200 non-English websites or "European" agriculture sites.

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | Congratulations

Wouter van Kampen — Tue, 15 Nov 2005 14:10:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Wouter van Kampen
Post title: Congratulations

You've got the message. :D

[quote]Marie-Helene Hayles wrote:

[quote]
"It was generally agreed upon that further intensivations should be anticipated with regard to furthering the issue of sustainability in a more extensive scope focussing on life cycle assessments in different member states throughout the European Union, for which the principles of subsidiarity will be underlined thus calling for a more unveiling approach of the institutions established up to date."
[/quote]
Surely intensivation's not a real word?![/quote]

[Edited at 2005-11-16 12:48]

[Edited at 2005-11-16 12:48]

[Edited at 2005-11-16 12:49]

[Edited at 2005-11-16 12:50]

[Edited at 2005-11-16 12:51]

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | intensivation????

Marie-Hélène Hayles — Tue, 15 Nov 2005 13:36:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Marie-Hélène Hayles
Post title: intensivation????

"It was generally agreed upon that further intensivations should be anticipated with regard to furthering the issue of sustainability in a more extensive scope focussing on life cycle assessments in different member states throughout the European Union, for which the principles of subsidiarity will be underlined thus calling for a more unveiling approach of the institutions established up to date."

Surely intensivation's not a real word?!

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | Re: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?

Andrew Steel — Tue, 15 Nov 2005 12:05:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Andrew Steel
Post title: Re: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?

[quote]Andrew Steel MCIL, MITI wrote:

Firstly, can anyone provide any references to EU English?

"It was generally agreed upon that further intensivations should be anticipated with regard to furthering the issue of sustainability in a more extensive scope focussing on life cycle assessments in different member states throughout the European Union, for which the principles of subsidiarity will be underlined thus calling for a more unveiling approach of the institutions established up to date."

[/quote]

What I really wanted to know was whether a definition of EU English exists (with style guide, etc.), and if there is such a thing, whether it favours UK or US usage.

[quote]
I would imagine that as a significant proportion of the texts are produced by the UK,

This would be in violation off one of the most basic rules of running EU bureaucracy. Do the utmost to maintain the political balance ;-)

[/quote]

Whoops. Nevertheless, as UK representatives make a significant input to many of the texts produced, I would imagine these texts to favour UK English.

[quote]

Unfortunately, more and more reports are written directly in a convulated speech in which the original meaning of words is often severely affected by underlying objectives (diplomacy) or a plain lack of thorough comprehension of British English.

[/quote]

But does this mean they favour US English?

Andrew

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | EU English, example given

Wouter van Kampen — Tue, 15 Nov 2005 09:30:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Wouter van Kampen
Post title: EU English, example given

[quote]Andrew Steel MCIL, MITI wrote:

Firstly, can anyone provide any references to EU English?

--snip--
[/quote]

"It was generally agreed upon that further intensivations should be anticipated with regard to furthering the issue of sustainability in a more extensive scope focussing on life cycle assessments in different member states throughout the European Union, for which the principles of subsidiarity will be underlined thus calling for a more unveiling approach of the institutions established up to date."

= We need more money in order to hire more consultants to write more reports.

[quote]
However, as far as I was aware, the EU institutions use UK English, the justification being that the UK is a member of the EU and the US, Australia, Canada, etc. are not.
[/quote]

Spell and grammar checking in accordance to UK-English rules is mandatory. Yes.

[quote]
That doesn't mean to say that EU-speak is easily comprehensible in English (or in any other member country's language), --snip--.
[/quote]

You are kidding :)

[quote]
I would imagine that as a significant proportion of the texts are produced by the UK,
[/quote]

This would be in violation off one of the most basic rules of running EU bureaucracy. Do the utmost to maintain the political balance ;-)

[quote]
and that staff translators into English at the EU institutions are more likely to be of UK origin,
[/quote]

That's true.

[quote]
that this would also affect the English most widely used.
[/quote]

Unfortunately, more and more reports are written directly in a convulated speech in which the original meaning of words is often severely affected by underlying objectives (diplomacy) or a plain lack of thorough comprehension of British English.

[quote]
There must be an EU policy on this, especially since it could also potentially affect the version of French, German and Spanish used - anyone know where to find a copy?
[/quote]

There are EU policies on just everything, beyond your most wildest imaginations.

[quote]Andrew[/quote]

[Edited at 2005-11-15 09:31]

Cheerio

[Edited at 2005-11-15 09:33]

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | Let's not forget 2 other potential sources

RHELLER — Mon, 14 Nov 2005 17:34:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: RHELLER
Post title: Let's not forget 2 other potential sources

Dear Lia and Buzzy,

In your U.S. vs UK debate, it seems to me that you have forgotten two things:

1)a sector of the world's translators: non-native speakers.

Espace non fumeurs - Space not smoking".
was obviously translated by a non-native, French or other. (and we have all experienced the amusing menus :-)

This is a growing sector and we see it everyday in the English monolingual section on Proz. Native speakers from the UK, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, etc. have difficulty "decoding" the English presented there. Of course, we try to help the best we can; it is not the fault of the asker who needs desperately to understand the source text in order to be accurate in his/her target language.

In addition, these non-native speakers have often spent time in the UK or the U.S. as part of their English degree/diploma. So, whatever expressions they may have learned in that country are revealed on the beach sign. The worst part is they love to use idiomatic and slang expressions, and those may offend the most.

and 2) machine translations
they are free and companies are using them; examples abound on the internet.

Personally, I* am at ease reading a well-written UK article but get upset (like Lia did) when I see "space not smoking". U.S. tourists see it as a type of disrespect to those who are not fluent in the native language of the country.

(*I lived in Europe for ten years, not the typical U.S. audience)

[Edited at 2005-11-14 17:38]

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | Up to us to check - clients aren't always aware

Buzzy — Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:17:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Buzzy
Post title: Up to us to check - clients aren't always aware

Interesting discussion. Of course ideally the target audience should decide the type of English used. But that means you need a defined target audience - and in practice lots of English translations in Europe are "the all-purpose international version".

As a Brit I have to confess to a preference for British English in Europe if there's no clear dominant audience - just as I'd expect US or Canadian English in North America. I went back to England this weekend and in the "Cit de l'Europe" shopping centre (or should that be mall?;-))on the French side of the Channel Tunnel my 12 year old daughter pointed out what she thought was a mistake: "toilettes - rest rooms". I told her it was American, rather than a mistake, although I was surprised, given that in this situation the dominant target audience is surely British. I also remember first coming across the word "stroller" (for me, a pushchair)in a leaflet at the Muse d'Orsay - unless they actually get more US than UK visitors, I thought that was a bit odd too. Still, at least it was better than the sign in the non-smoking part of one self-service restaurant near the Tunnel: "Espace non fumeurs - Space not smoking".

But why, in some sites I have seen, is there a mix of US and GB EN? Becuase US translators have translated them, and either they or the client have overlooked this issue. [/quote]

Lia, can you really assume it's only US translators not picking up on this? If we don't raise the issue, many clients don't even think about it. They tend in my experience not to be very aware of differences, even in spelling. Or even, come to that, of the importance of general consistency of presentation - sometimes even in the original language version. And some translators seem to regard detail-checking as not part of their remit (maybe due to silly deadlines, or not being told that what they're working on is part of a bigger project). I think it's still down to us to ask the question, if only to raise awareness.

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | What is EU English?

Andrew Steel — Mon, 14 Nov 2005 08:22:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Andrew Steel
Post title: What is EU English?

Firstly, can anyone provide any references to EU English?

Secondly, and in answer to Lia's question, in the private sector the decision is down to the party contracting the translation.

However, as far as I was aware, the EU institutions use UK English, the justification being that the UK is a member of the EU and the US, Australia, Canada, etc. are not.

That doesn't mean to say that EU-speak is easily comprehensible in English (or in any other member country's language), but the spelling and word choice should follow UK usage.

I would imagine that as a significant proportion of the texts are produced by the UK, and that staff translators into English at the EU institutions are more likely to be of UK origin, that this would also affect the English most widely used.

There must be an EU policy on this, especially since it could also potentially affect the version of French, German and Spanish used - anyone know where to find a copy?

Andrew

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | !!!!!

Lia Fail (X) — Mon, 14 Nov 2005 00:24:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Lia Fail (X)
Post title: !!!!!

[quote]Rita Heller wrote:

Then they will need a website in UK EN AND in US EN if they are trying to do business with both!!!!!
---------------------------------------------------------

First of all, Lia, contain the number of exclamation points, please. Are you shocked by my position?

I happen to be one of the few U.S. born, U.S. educated French-English translators on this website and everyone is always thinking I am wrong. I am not wrong, just expressing a different point of view...and that obviously rankles more than just a few.

The differences between U.S. and U.K. English amount to more than just spelling differences. What about terminology and syntax?

Yes, just like websites have one page for French (indicated by flag) and one page for English, they could easily have an additional page for U.S. English, if they so choose. If the client is really looking to attack the U.S. market they MUST use language consumers feel comfortable with.
[/quote]

I think I am as entitled to use as many !!!! as I like, sorry:-) :-) :-)

I have never 'thought' you 'wrong', in fact you have always helped me enormously......

Precisely, which is why I think default EN in Europe should be GB EN, and we European translators should never have to query which variety, as it seems logical to assume that the EN of Europe will be GB EN...if clients want US EN, they should specify, not us who should ask. But why, in some sites I have seen, is there a mix of US and GB EN? Becuase US translators have translated them, and either they or the client have overlooked this issue.

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | I do.....

Lia Fail (X) — Mon, 14 Nov 2005 00:14:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Lia Fail (X)
Post title: I do.....

[quote]JL Baker wrote:

"If the client is really looking to attack the U.S. market they MUST use language consumers feel comfortable with"

Thanks Rita. Many of my clients hire me for precisely that reason, even though I live in an EU country and the majority of my clients are Italian. My clients know I'm American and write American English.

"I am afraid I continue to be shocked by teh public announcement on Barcelona's beaches in CAT, ES, FR, DE, then a sonorous and very US accent for the EN version"

Lia, is this really cause for being "shocked"? In my humble opinion, no.

My Best, Jennifer

[Edited at 2005-11-13 11:02][/quote]

...feel shocked...meaning I'm practically launched off my beach towel...it's a particularly sonorous US accent...:-)

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | As for the rest of us...

Jennifer Baker — Sun, 13 Nov 2005 11:01:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Jennifer Baker
Post title: As for the rest of us...

"If the client is really looking to attack the U.S. market they MUST use language consumers feel comfortable with"

Thanks Rita. Many of my clients hire me for precisely that reason, even though I live in an EU country and the majority of my clients are Italian. My clients know I'm American and write American English.

"I am afraid I continue to be shocked by teh public announcement on Barcelona's beaches in CAT, ES, FR, DE, then a sonorous and very US accent for the EN version"

Lia, is this really cause for being "shocked"? In my humble opinion, no.

My Best, Jennifer

[Edited at 2005-11-13 11:02]

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | U.S. page and UK page on ONE website

RHELLER — Sat, 12 Nov 2005 16:07:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: RHELLER
Post title: U.S. page and UK page on ONE website

Then they will need a website in UK EN AND in US EN if they are trying to do business with both!!!!!
---------------------------------------------------------

First of all, Lia, contain the number of exclamation points, please. Are you shocked by my position?

I happen to be one of the few U.S. born, U.S. educated French-English translators on this website and everyone is always thinking I am wrong. I am not wrong, just expressing a different point of view...and that obviously rankles more than just a few.

The differences between U.S. and U.K. English amount to more than just spelling differences. What about terminology and syntax?

Yes, just like websites have one page for French (indicated by flag) and one page for English, they could easily have an additional page for U.S. English, if they so choose. If the client is really looking to attack the U.S. market they MUST use language consumers feel comfortable with.

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | Historicity

Puicz (X) — Sat, 12 Nov 2005 11:13:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Puicz (X)
Post title: Historicity

[quote]Lia Fail wrote: Can you say WHY it should be GB????

The simple answer is, historicity. What English standard was the norm in the Europe of 40 years ago? What English standard did the great Irish writers use?
I havent the faintest notion of what EU English is. Is it something laid down by a wise and enlightened body in Brussels?
Until a majority of Europeans can speak English freely and write it grammatically I dont see the situation changing, unless we reach a stage where smileys are used in books.

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | Noah Webster

Edward Potter — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 20:21:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Edward Potter
Post title: Noah Webster

This man is the culprit. Anyone want to post some interesting links on Noah Webster?

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | My sum up:-)

Lia Fail (X) — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:01:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Lia Fail (X)
Post title: My sum up:-)

The British among us, amd myself as Irish, seem to defend GB EN for the EU. This is supported by the EU choice of GB EN for distortion purposes in EU circles:-)

I see institutional names translated by what you might call 'insensitive' non-EN inhousers in Spain with 'CENTER' for example, and it happens largely becuase of the pervasisve influence of EU EN, or occasionally becuase ES spelling is more similar to US (e.g. organiZar) and US spelling is less complex (and I for one, would rather we all used Zs!!!)...not becuase of a conscious decision. And then the webiste or papers get translated in GB EN, so we are forced to spell the insitution by the 'official' name, yet the rest of teh text is GB EN....

I am afraid I continue to be shocked by teh public announcement on Barcelona's beaches in CAT, ES, FR, DE, then a sonorous and very US accent for the EN version.............Like I siad, imagine a Spanish person in London hearing a public announcemnt in Latin American Spanish.

I suppose though, all in all, that US cultural influence is greater than GB cultural influence, so that's a reality we have to live with.

BUT I will defend GB EN for the EU, we are partners, in upholding our languages too:-) After all, GB EN i9s my language, and the EU is my playing field, I don't want to be rendered obsolete:-)

Thanks all:-)

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | yes...and maybe

Lia Fail (X) — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:46:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Lia Fail (X)
Post title: yes...and maybe

[quote]Richard Creech wrote:

The choice of idiom should depend on the client and the client's intended usage. In this sense a choice of American versus British styles is no different from other stylistic choices (e.g. writing formally or informally, for the technically savy or the lay person, etc.) One should of course note that there are other forms of English such as Canadian English which are in some ways a blend of American and British influences. Moreover, given that far more people speak English as a second language than do so natively, we can expect in the coming generations for new varieties of English to emerge that are fed by influences from other linguistic traditions.[/quote]

...with the WWW US and GB EN will again converge, at least in more formal communications. Yes, i could have mentioned CAN EN, but my CAN friend here writes more GB than US. As for Australia/NZ, well, we could probably assume that formal style there is more GB than US.

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | The problem here....

Lia Fail (X) — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:43:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Lia Fail (X)
Post title: The problem here....

[quote]David Brown wrote:

[quote]Lia Fail wrote:

This is a question that has bothered me for a long time (too!).

I always ask if unsure. I receive work from the USA (US English) and the UK (UK English) and from Spain and other European countries. If the translation is for publishing in a medical/scientific or any journal, I always ask which one (USA or GB), the European journals published in English don't seem to mind and that is were the European English comes in. Normally agencies specify, but if not ask. I once shared a large translation project where the other 2 translators were Americans and I am British. One of the American translators was also the proofreader, needless to say my work looked like it had many corrections/ mistakes. That agency never used me again, and since then I always ask. Many people (especially non-native English speakers)don't even realise there is a difference.[/quote]

..........is that I don't write US EN, all I can do is spellcheck according to US EN. I don't even ask, I assume they know my variety is GB EN, and that I shouldn't be asked to do US EN. In other words, it seems logical to assume:

that EU EN is GB EN
that if US EN is required then this should be specified
-> but default is GB EN:-)

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | yes but......

Lia Fail (X) — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:39:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Lia Fail (X)
Post title: yes but......

[quote]Rita Heller wrote:

If the company is Europe-centered then BE is fine.

I am from the U.S. and know that if a website is seeking to do business in the U.S. they will not have as much success if they use BE. Why? Because the majority of U.S. residents do NOT understand a lot of UK terminology and their comfort level is challenged when they see cheque (not check), flat (not apartment),lorry (not truck).

Usually, businesses engage other business services because they have confidence in their capacity to "know" the issues/challenges of their specific market. It's all about instilling confidence.

To Lia:
usually it is the client/agency that specifies UK or US English; the translator does not decide. Even on proz, jobs are sorted that way and I do not receive UK job alerts.

To titi:
In Europe, shouldn't Strasbourg (France) be written as it is spelled in France?
[/quote]

Then they will need a website in UK EN AND in US EN if they are trying to do business with both!!!!!

Thing is Rita, I have a feeling GB EN is not insidiously invasive in the US as is US EN here in Europe, like I said, i have seen many sites in Spain with mixes...

What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe? | I think it DOES matter

Lia Fail (X) — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:36:00 +0000

Forum: Translation Theory and Practice
Topic: What variety of English should be used (by default) in Europe?
Poster: Lia Fail (X)
Post title: I think it DOES matter

[quote]Derek Gill Franen wrote:

I don't think it matters that much - though Mikhail's comment is certainly the right way to go - as long as one is consistent (IMHO). :-)[/quote]

So as to avoid mixes in websites, for example!

To defend a variety of language in its proper domain maybe too!