A real waste of time and money – but oh, wot de hack
Times of Malta reported on 12 September about the use of Maltese in the European Parliament. Such a waste of time and money – but then a mini-industry has been built up around the translation of documents into Maltese, to say nothing of all those people with their jobs as translators and interpreters.
All for nothing, because when Maltese people want to read EU documents, they request the English version.
MALTESE USED FIVE MINUTES A MONTH
MEPs are calling for a more “efficient and cost-effective” use of interpretation services at the European Parliament to save money.
Some €58 million a year is spent on translation work in 24 languages.
A report drawn up by Esther de Lange, from the European Parliament Budgetary Committee, cites Estonian and Maltese as the least used during plenary sessions.
English, German and French are by far the most spoken languages with Maltese only used for 195 minutes in almost three-and-a-half years while Estonian was used for just 109 minutes.
Although Maltese is rarely used in the European Chamber, it is still regarded as one of the official languages of the EU, obliging institutions to provide full interpretation services. This involves engaging a raft of Maltese interpreters and supporting staff.
The same applies to all the other 23 languages, which lately includes Croatian. Prior to accession, Malta had fought hard to acquire a status of official language for Maltese. This provided a good employment opportunity for many citizens both as translators and interpreters.
However, many EU critics use the example of ‘small languages’, such as Maltese, Estonian, Latvian and Gaelic, as an example of the EU’s waste of money.
9 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
What percentage of MEP’s is calling for more “efficient and cost-effective” use of interpretation services at the European Parliament to save money?
Does this mean they are ready to accept that certain languages no longer be used in the European Parliament?
Or that they be no longer official languages of the EU? I suspect no MEP would be in favour of his national language being ousted as he might lose his/her seat.
It would probably make a lot of sense to have only English as the EU official language since it is the language most in use during EU Commission meetings but who is going to risk making such a suggestion?
I believe that all or nothing is not the correct direction to take. It would be useful to determine at what instances all languages need to be translated, and it would be an error to assume a flat equal level of comprehension and fluency for all. Would standards lower and simplify for the common benefit of all participants or would technically refined registers be maintained, force them to improve their own?
Additionally, and currently, the Germans are not as fluent in English as they may wish us believe, the French are too proud to make the first mistake, Italians may be difficult to understand even if they are speaking their own version of learnt English, and the Maltese in Brussels… well, we’ve had our moments even if they were not of our making… etc.
I am confident that if the time was ripe for it, the notion of efficiency would overtake any ego managed brakes on the issue, even before a motion was brought to the table.
A more efficient balance should be struck, but Maltese as the only semitic language within the EU has its own singular showcase value.
D. Borg’s suggestion below that more investment should be made is interesting and the press should really consult and double-check with the specific new word department at University before printing whatever it feels is a correct new word in Maltese. More haste, less speed would help here in Malta, for starters.
More on the issue, from a French perspective:
http://www.euractiv.fr/culture/les-francais-sentent-leur-influe-news-529276?goback=%2Egde_2965501_member_276433491#%21
Anyone who has ever seen these translations would know how ridiculous it all is. Most documents just cannot be translated into Maltese. The vocabulary and grammar do not support it.
The Maltese translation unit is the only one to my knowledge that does not have REAL translators, as in people who actually studied Translation and Interpretation. Meanwhile, their peers are mostly expert translators for their own languages.
Following Joseph Muscat’s outburst at the EP, I had pointed out that if a fraction of what is spent in translation is actually invested in the Maltese language (literature, spell checks, online translation etc.), it would serve our language and the Maltese much better.
Nothing has changed….
I think you are missing a glaring point. In case of conflict between the Maltese translation and the original translation (usually French, sometimes English) – the latter version will prevail. This is a given.
So, bearing in mind that the English language is one of the island’s official languages, on a par with the Maltese Language – the question is simply ‘why’?
Do we really have to sponsor bottom-feeding, legal rejects to translate (very poorly) some obscure directive? As always – follow the money!
In my opinion all the billions of euros going into the pockets of those fat cats at Brussels are just waste of public money. Much much better use can be made with this money.
On a point of principle, as long as all the official languages of all EU member states are deemed as official languages of the Union, no Maltese government should renounce to the Maltese language being an official language like all others.
However, practical arrangements are possible without diminishing its present status, while achieving reasonable economies.
EU documents which will have to be incorporated into Maltese laws should be translated into Maltese by the EU at its expense.
A Maltese MEP should be able to speak in Maltese with a simultaneous interpretation into English (also our official language), on which all other interpretations will follow. Such service will also be at EU expense. These being exceptional occasions, mainly to maintain the status of the language, would produce great savings.
One need not insist on simultaneous interpretation into Maltese. The same would apply for working documents. This would also provide great savings. Maltese MEP worthy of the office should not feel disadvantaged.
Having said this I would never accept that only the Maltese language would be discriminated in such a manner.
See his lips quiver – and does he use the F word before flouncing out?