Draft Presentation for the Panel “Translating Institutions” (Lisbon, 27-29/9/2004)
Reine Meylaerts
FWO-KULeuven
Institution
 = legitimised social grouping
 organise information, confer identity and model interactions of members of a society
 organise classifications and direct memory; what are the unthinkables and
unmemorables becomes a crucial question then
 channel perceptions
 people make institutions – institutions make classifications – classifications entail
actions – actions call for names – names are responded to by people, positively and
negatively
Institutional translation
 Every translation is institutional: translations do not exist independently on any
organisation(s) or framework(s).
 Every translation is the result of interaction between agent(s) and structure(s), between
the individual and the collective, between mind and institution.
 What is important in this respect is to clarify the exact nature and the possible
variations and variables of this relation in a certain context. How individual/how
collective is human behaviour i.c. translation?



The dynamics of translation is dependent on given language policies, hence on
societies and institutions. Therefore, translation deserves to be envisaged as an issue
for institutional research.
If societies adapt and revise their approach to language and translation to their own
priorities, then it is astonishing that institutional topics were until now not really in the
centre of debates within Translation Studies.
Of course, institutions are not only national frameworks. So, what kind of other
institutional structures do we need to take into account in view of a panoramic
representation of translation and how do they relate?
Legal translation in Belgium from an institutional viewpoint
 In general, the very organisation of translation services is part of the political strategy
of the modern nation. Moreover, language and translation are key components in
Belgian society; they are intimately linked with the societies’ fundamental (identitary)
evolutions.

1830: creation of Belgium following the romantic model of the West European nationstate, i.e. one official language, French for state administration, justice, education

of course, the number of officially recognised languages is different from the really
used languages: French (dialects) and Flemish (dialects), German after World War I


very absence of translation in the beginning of Belgian history due to the dominant
position of French
translation developed little by little as one of the consequences of the multilingualism
of society, i.e. of the linguistico-political emancipation claims of the Flemish

dissymmetry in legal translation until approximately World War II:
o mainly from French into Flemish
o translation is kept as much as possible an occasional phenomenon thus serving
official French monolingualism: only when explicitly asked for citizens can
become Flemish documents, services…
o 1886: coins become bilingual
o 1888: bank notes become bilingual
o 1888: first Flemish address in Chamber of Deputies
o 1891: stamps become bilingual
o 1896: laws are promulgated not only in French but also in Flemish
o 1913: first Flemish address in Senate
o 1923: Constitution is translated into Flemish by a special commission
o 1925: Flemish translation of Constitution appears in the law gazette
o 1930: first Flemish university in Ghent
o 1932: Flemish administration in the North, French in the South, bilingual in
Brussels
o 1932: Flemish primary and secondary schools in the North, French in the
South, Flemish or French in Brussels
o 1932: instauration of Flemish Parliamentary Summary Report (French exists
since 1872)
o 1932: government policy statement for the first time not only in French but
also in Flemish
o 1935: Flemish justice in the North, French in the South, bilingual in Brussels
o 1936: introduction of simultaneous translation in Parliament

from one century after Independence onwards, reciprocity in translation (French into
Flemish and Flemish into French) becomes more and more the rule, Belgium being an
officially bilingual country but with monolingual regions:
o federal laws are promulgated in French and in Flemish in the Law Gazette
without indication of direction of translation
o laws and administration of the Flemish region only in Flemish, of the Walloon
region only in French, in Brussels always both in French and in Flemish
Translation Policy within political institutions:
o Chamber of Deputies: Integral Parliamentary Reports: bilingual edition with at
the left of each page the integral report in original language (Flemish or
French) and at the right the translated summarized version (Flemish or French)
o Chamber of Deputies: Summary Reports: French text at the left of each page,
Flemish text at the right of each page; some (Flemish and French)
interventions are preceded by the mention ‘in French’, at least for these it is
clear that they are translated; for all interventions without such a mention it is
not clear what was the source language and what is the translation
o Senate: Integral Reports: bilingual edition with at the left French and at the
right Flemish; translation is printed in italics; long interventions are also
summarized in translation
o Senate: Summary Reports (until 2000): two separate editions, one in French,
one in Flemish
o Brussels Parliament: Integral Reports: edition with at the left French and at the
right Flemish; translation is printed in italics; long interventions are also
summarized in translation
o Brussels Parliament: Summary Reports: monolingual French or Flemish
versions; with mention of what has been said in the other language
o Brussels Government: Summary Reports: monolingual French or Flemish
versions; with mention of what has been said in the other language
o Brussels Government: Integral Reports: bilingual edition with at the left
French and at the right Flemish; translation is printed in italics; long
interventions are also summarized in translation