Model conference
of the Faculty of International Relations
Cultural Section
Cultural Policy of the European Union
Statement of Slovak Republic
Bratislava, 22.11.2014
Model Conference of the Faculty of International Relations
Cultural Section: Draft 2
Model Conference of the Faculty of International Relations
on the Cultural Policy of the European Union
The Slovak Republic appreciates initiative of Model Conference to discuss the European
language policy according to its extent in present globalized multicultural world. The Slovak Republic
would like to express its gratitude, interest and support in solving crucial points about the current
approaches, costs, efficiency and future perspectives of the European Language Policy.
The phenomenon of the European language policy is relatively new comparing to others policies of
integration. Its importance and necessity has risen with the biggest enlargement of EU in 2004, when
were added next 9 languages (represented with population of almost 75 million inhabitants) to the
existing group of 11 official and working languages. EU language policy is based on principle of
subsidiarity so the responsibility incur on member states.
a) Language policy
Before the start of negotiations regarding the Slovak Republic’s membership in the European Union,
Slovak Republic has argued, that Slovak language should become one of the official and working
languages of integration after its entrance to the EU, and that its citizens should have the same rights
and duties as others citizens of the European Union. Later on in 2004, the Slovak language became
one of the official languages of the EU.
During its membership the Slovak Republic has experienced that the equality of languages among
member states is rather theoretical. State institutions have expressed their discontent with the current
position of the Slovak language and translations amongst EU institutions. At the present time Slovak
Republic faces lack of well qualified translators and interpreters to meet the requirements on language
services for EU institutions.
There is no institutional support that would be comprehensively addressed to issue of language policy,
which could prepare an integrated comprehensive strategy. Regarding the importance of European
affairs in Slovak Republic, a platform for political discussion concerning political approaches
represented by both governmental and nongovernmental sphere was created, so called National
Convention on EU (“NCEU”) covered by the Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs of the Slovak
Republic. Several plenary sessions of NCEU held between 2006-2008 were devoted to the Slovak
language policy standpoints for EU, held by working group “Language Policy within the European
Union“. The language policy was one of the three major priorities to be discussed.
This europlatform for development of common standpoints on questions concerning the common
policies and institutions of the Union worked out “The Linguistic-political strategy of the Slovak Republic
as a member state of the EU”.
The concept of linguistic - political strategy of SR can be summarized in three main points:
 The issue of sustaining national and cultural identity of Slovakia, including Slovak and other
languages of national minorities living in Slovakia
-2-
Model Conference of the Faculty of International Relations
Cultural Section: Draft 2
 Application of Slovak language in EU as an equal language;
 Proposal to create a model of effective communication within the EU and particularly its
institutions.
“The European Union is not and cannot be a great nation state in the sense, that it should have one or
two official languages. Because of its historical roots, it is clear that the Union will speak many
languages. This one should not be changed. However, it is necessary to provide a higher level of
language proficiency for all of EU citizens. “ 1
b) Financial framework and c) Multilingualism
The effectivity of current approaches in language policy of EU is rather a moot point. The main aim of
qualitative and exact translation should be the direct translation from one language to another, rather
than through a convertor/ bridging language as English, French, German etc, where up to 50% of the
whole content of communications can be lost.
As a matter in discussed issue we would point to inappropriate the preparation and education of
interpreters and translators, which focuses mainly on the more widely spoken and used languages
rather than the rest of the official and working languages of the EU. We would suggest that the offer of
language programs at universities should widen to prepare translator and interpreters for all official and
working languages of the EU to promote, support and strengthen the diversity of the EU and its
multilingualism and qualitative translations within public institutions.
The representation of Slovak Republic is in favour of multilingual approach, keeping all languages of
member states as official languages of the EU. But concerning the financial costs when using all of
them and in the result of necessity of lowering the expenditures and better communication it is requisite
measure to put certain communication mechanism into practice.
The assurance of qualitative translators for 420 communication channels is difficult not only technically,
but also personally and financially. To remain efficient, it is necessary to search for other solutions,
which would take into account the democratic and economic issues of the provision of translation
services.
“With a permanent staff of 1,750 linguists and 600 support staff, the Commission has one of the largest
translation services in the world, bolstered by a further 600 full-time and 3,000 freelance interpreters. In
order to reduce the cost to the European taxpayer, the European Commission is increasingly
endeavouring to operate in the three core languages of the European Union; English, French, and
German, while developing responsive language policies to serve the remaining 21 official language
groups.“2
Considering the price of translations in the EU, “in 2004–07, the number of official EU languages
doubled from 11 to 23, but Commission translation costs increased by only 20%. The cost of all
language services in all EU institutions amounts to less than 1% of the annual general budget of the EU,
1
2
Ján Fígeľ European Commissioner for Education, Training and Culture from 2004 to 2009
http://ec.europa.eu/languages/policy/language-policy/official_languages_sk.htm
-3-
Model Conference of the Faculty of International Relations
Cultural Section: Draft 2
divided by the population of the EU, this comes to around €2 per person per year.”3 As has mentioned
Alexander Stubb4 it is not big price for democracy and effective cooperation.
Up to 16% of the costs of interpretation and translations are accounted for services that have been
ordered but not used respectively cancelled at the very last moment. According to this the
corresponding cancellation fee was charged.5 This is where we see the way to save.
As a proposal for a possible solution we would suggest using of three languages for negotiations in the
European Parliament and other EU institutions with the aim to lower the translation costs. According to
the favouring of these three languages (English, German, French) we would like to propose the
determination of exact financial amount contributed by the states with mother language as working one
to the member states with mother language different than working language. This would help the states
to cover the expenses for translations and interpreters. To make it clear some of the expenses would be
covered from the EU budget up to the settled/given amount and after its overdrawing the rest would be
met by member state itself.
One of the possible communication mechanism to be used, which we are supporting, is using of three
exerted working languages, namely English, French and German only in the working field. But we would
like to stick to the opinion, that each of the European citizens should have the right to be informed about
new facts and all the information should be available in their mother language. The usage of these three
working language would be dedicated to working purposes only and for the communication between the
representatives of a state and the EU institutions.
We would like to point at the fact, that financial costs related with translations will rise mainly for small
member states, which language is not used as working language, such as Slovakia. On the contrary
member states such France, Germany and Great Britain will not have any additional costs related to
communication, which we see as unequal.
We assume that countries are represented by educated individuals who can speak and have required
knowledge to negotiate at least in one of the mentioned operative languages. The courses would help
them to improve their knowledge, language and negotiating skills.
But not forgetting about given statement, we would keep the multilingual approach in respect to lingual
and cultural heritage of each member state. There would be the possibility that the representative could
express herself/himself in one of the official languages – her/his mother language, but represented
member state would cover the expenses for the interpreter. And also in respect to the right to
information of every European (EU) citizen we would demand that the official documents, statements
and hearings and negotiation summaries must be edited and published in all official languages.
In compliance with preservation of language and cultural diversity of the EU we evaluate this proposal
as compromising option which would help to reduce markedly the translation costs and also access to
all important information in their official language.
As another option we would like to point at the similarity of the Czech and Slovak languages, which
used to be official languages in one country and are clearly understandable one another, could be used
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation/faq/index_en.htm
http://www.euractiv.sk/kultura-a-media/clanok/naklady-vynalozene-na-preklady
5 http://www.euractiv.sk/skupina-epp-els/clanok/tlmocenie-vinstituciach-eu-stoji-163-miliard-eur
3
4
-4-
Model Conference of the Faculty of International Relations
Cultural Section: Draft 2
in European context. The translation channels in European Parliament could be covered on a rota basis
of Slovakian and Czech translators, and in some discussions there could be one translator for both
countries’ representatives according to some previous agreement, which could reduce all expenses. At
this point we would be open to discuss it with delegates of the Czech Republic.
Our next suggestion to cut the EU communication expenses, having regard to equality, we are
in favour of using Esperanto as neutral language. Considering the efforts towards the actual EU
initiative for all citizens being able to speak mother language and two other foreign languages is not
effective to the expected level. According “the results and comparison of Euro barometer research in the
years 2005 and 2012 about the language skills self evaluated by citizens have shown, that the situation
was even worse estimated about 1 to 3%( in each question about the languages 1, 2, 3 or non),
multilingualism did not widen but has narrowed to the popular languages and English has strengthened
its position in the EU. “ (Reinvart)
Esperanto being a neutral language would prevent the divergent opinions and statements of
member states in language policy field and it would avoid the misunderstanding, tense and conflicts
between the member states. “Orientation on common (neutral) language would dismiss the
categorization of languages within the EU and would help to their equalization. The first foreign
language for all EU citizens would be common (neutral) language - Esperanto and the next foreign
language they would choose according their own needs and interests. Instead of so called “Barcelona
model”, which was mentioned above 1+2 more appropriate would be new model:1+1+1.. (Reinvart)
Reaching equal status for all official and working languages, including Slovak, in all EU
institutions can be accomplished only by changing and readjusting current liberal EU language policy
into the new EU language policy based on preparation of a conjunctive framework for constructive and
realistic policy. Three assumptions can be regarded as possible solutions in the aforementioned issue:
equality of all official and working languages, searching and selecting common language or selection of
a certain representative languages.
In Bratislava, 22.11.2014
Bc. Martina Hianiková
Bc. Katarína Hubocká
Bc. Terézia Polakovičová
Delegation of Slovak Republic
of Culture Section
in The Model conference
of the Faculty of International
Relations
-5-