At least seven capitals have raised concerns over the costs and political implications of the move, which Sánchez links to defense spending.
  • 5714@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    464·
    5 days ago

    The rejection is bad for European integration and the idea of a Europe of the Regions.

    Languages could have a Opt-in translation fund that enables them as official language on EU level.

    Also, WTF France.

    • Nougat@fedia.io
      321·
      5 days ago

      Language and ethnicity go hand in hand in hand. If you hear people bitching about languages they don’t speak, or being very proud of the language they do speak, it’s because they’re racist.

      So yeah, France.

      • idiomaddict@lemmy.worldEnglish
        9·
        5 days ago

        I’m proud to have learned German as a second language, because it’s complex and precise, not because of any preexisting affinity for German speaking people.

        • gusgalarnyk@lemmy.worldEnglish
          9·
          5 days ago

          As someone learning German right now, I can agree on complex but I’m not sure precise is very accurate. There seems to be a lot of assumptions based on context to know what one means. Maybe a more educated person could chime in, but I have not felt like the German language has made things more precise in communicating concepts (but full disclosure I’m at the A1 level going into A2).

          • Saleh@feddit.orgEnglish
            2·
            3 days ago

            German can be very precise. However it requires people to pay attention to the details, which they often don’t.

            The nuances become dependent on context and the respective knowledge of the originator and receptor.

            Legal German for instance is very precise, in that every word matters. But then you need to analyze every word and understand its context.

            I have taken a random paragraph from the civil law (BGB) (note that i am not a lawyer and only learned some of the interpretation of civil laws in basic courses for non legal professionals, so it is just my best guess. It should suffice for getting the point accross.)

            § 851 Ersatzleistung an Nichtberechtigten

            Leistet der wegen der Entziehung oder Beschädigung einer beweglichen Sache zum Schadensersatz Verpflichtete den Ersatz an denjenigen, in dessen Besitz sich die Sache zur Zeit der Entziehung oder der Beschädigung befunden hat, so wird er durch die Leistung auch dann befreit, wenn ein Dritter Eigentümer der Sache war oder ein sonstiges Recht an der Sache hatte, es sei denn, dass ihm das Recht des Dritten bekannt oder infolge grober Fahrlässigkeit unbekannt ist.

            Actually this example is perfect. First of all, it is just one construct of main sentence and side sentences. Lets dive in:

            Leistet der wegen der Entziehung oder Beschädigung einer beweglichen Sache zum Schadensersatz Verpflichtete den Ersatz an denjenigen

            “If the person who is liable for the damage or withholding of a movable object pays the replacement to the person who”

            in dessen Besitz sich die Sache zur Zeit der Entziehung oder der Beschädigung befunden hat

            “the person who, had ownership (not the same as property rights) on the object at the time of the damage or withholding”

            So this second sentence is specifying the person in question.

            so wird er durch die Leistung auch dann befreit

            “so he will be freed of the duty even if”

            Note that the “he” here is the person who has the duty to pay liability

            wenn ein Dritter Eigentümer der Sache war oder ein sonstiges Recht an der Sache hatte

            “if a third person is proprietor of the object or had another right on the object”

            es sei denn, dass ihm das Recht des Dritten bekannt oder infolge grober Fahrlässigkeit unbekannt ist.

            “except that he had known the right of the third person or his lack of knowledge comes from gross negligence.”

            Again the “he” is the one who owes the liability.

            What does all of that mean? Take for example you damage the car of a rental company. If you didn’t see the car to be of a rental company and the driver tells you “give me 1,000 € and the damage is covered” and you pay that to him, you don’t owe another 1,000 € to the rental company when it comes to you. However if you had known it to be a rental car or you must have known, as for instance the logo of the rental company is on the car with the notice that this car is rentable, then you owe the money to the rental company.

            However this has a few caveats for which it is crucial to read every single word and understand it. First of all the object needs to be movable. So if you damage a house this paragraph does not apply. Then you have to have the duty to pay the compensation and you have to give compensation for this law to apply. All of this is in the first sentence.

            Then it is important that the object has been in the control/ownership of the person you give it to at the time of the damage. Now obviously if the driver is inside the car that is clear. But what if he was about to pick up the car from the parking lot and he has already unlocked it, but not entered yet as you damage it. Is he in ownership of the car yet? Here lawyers will start to have fun arguing. Also important is that the right was “had”. When was it “had”? At the time when the liability was created.

            Third is then pretty straightforward for the example of a rental car. The car is property of the rental company. However what if the property is disputed, say because it is a slightly damaged shipment from one business to another business and they argue if the property was transferred or not? Which brings us to the exception that this does not work if you know or would have had to know that the property rights belong to someone else. Again something lawyers will have fun with.

          • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
            2·
            3 days ago

            Standard German can be all of precise, succinct, and clear at the same time trouble with that is that nobody talks like that. It’s a Dachsprache / contact variety build out by, among other disciplines, science. By all measures the stuff you learn in school (whether abroad or domestically) is a constructed language. And it’s mostly science which uses that kind of mode, e.g. administrative German is precise and (notoriously, excessively) objective but also verbose AF.

            And it seems to be a mode that doesn’t really translate. I’m always baffled by Anglos saying that Kant is hard to read.

          • idiomaddict@lemmy.worldEnglish
            14·
            5 days ago

            Written German is incredibly precise, IMO (I have C2 German, teach it as a second language at a university in Germany, and am currently getting a masters degree in German instruction). I came from a background in legal writing in English, and the amount of references that each sentence after the first in a text needs to the sentence before it was still staggering. The grade on my first thesis paper was an unwelcome surprise, but it can be learned.

            • gusgalarnyk@lemmy.worldEnglish
              3·
              5 days ago

              Just attempting to understand what you wrote here, are you saying that German writing requires a massive number of references to past statements to be understood and that somehow makes it more precise?

              • idiomaddict@lemmy.worldEnglish
                5·
                5 days ago

                Well, yes. I can write a series of sentences in English without building in references to explain exactly how they relate to each other, but German writing explicates their relationship to each other.

                Thus there’s technically more vagueness in written English, though the reader makes the leap (if the writer is an effective communicator).

                As a small example, I went back and forth about including “thus” in the above sentence. I don’t think it’s necessary even in formal, written English, but it would be in German.

          • Lumiluz@slrpnk.netEnglish
            1·
            3 days ago

            There’s still exceptions.

            For example, Spanish is my first language. I didn’t really care for it much, but the more I learned other languages the more I’ve come to really like Spanish because it has well defined rules and a LACK of EXCEPTIONS (looking at Finnish specifically. English at least is so broken you can understand it when grammatically wrong, but Finnish clearly needs a revision).

            What’s the point of learning the grammar rules when 25% is “actually there’s no reason behind this word not following the rules so you’ll just have to remember it’s different”??? Even more frustrating when the rules can still perfectly work with covering the topic or the word! To the point of you can say it “wrong” by following existing grammar rules but still be understood sometimes because it makes more sense than the damn actual usage of the word!

            And then some rules are dumb. Either go full out like Chinese and make a writing system separate from your spoken system or actually have one comply with the other.

      • DaPorkchop_@lemmy.mlEnglish
        6·
        5 days ago

        I complain about French all the time not because I hate French people but because I can’t remember which direction the fucking accent goes, it’s been like 8 years of failing French class, please send help

  • ignirtoq@fedia.io
    272·
    5 days ago

    France, for instance, has a national policy against the recognition of domestic minority languages like Basque, Breton and Corsican.

    Trying to give France the benefit of the doubt, but this just sounds like oppression. Is there a good reason France doesn’t recognize minority languages in its territory?

    • jenesaisquoi@feddit.orgEnglish
      13·
      3 days ago

      The official reason is that they want to unite the country in one language, such that people are together, not divided.

      The actual reason is “lmao get rekt learn french u peasant” but in French.

    • kunaltyagiEnglish
      2·
      4 days ago

      What about countries where no language has a majority only a plurality? Does the French govt just assume those countries don’t speak any language?

  • tal@lemmy.todayEnglish
    212·
    5 days ago

    In exchange for key support needed to form a new minority government in 2023, Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez entered into an elaborate deal with Catalan separatist lawmakers in which he committed to getting Catalan, Basque and Galician recognized as official languages of the EU.

    The move requires unanimous backing of the bloc’s 27 member countries, and Spanish officials spent the past two years lobbying European capitals for support.

    My understanding is that each EU member got to choose a single official language, and that the EU was obliged to support that language. Regardless of whether Spain is willing to pay in perpetuity, I have a hard time believing that Spain is going to get unanimous support, since it’d presumably create a can of worms for other governments who would then get political pressure from regional groups to fund their particular favored languages as official EU languages, and who may not want to fund that. I mean, kind of a slap in the face to various regional groups in other countries if Galician gets official EU language status, but a regional language in another EU member that has official status at a national level doesn’t.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_official_languages_by_country_and_territory

    There are a lot of official languages at the national level there.

    EDIT: Maybe Spain could just commit to internally providing and funding Catalan, Basque, and Galician translations of EU official documents, as that wouldn’t require sign-off from other EU members.

    EDIT2: Huh. Apparently none of Catalan, Basque, and Galician actually have official language status today at the national level in Spain. If they were to become EU official languages, I think that they might be the only languages that don’t have national official status, but do have EU official status.

    • Saleh@feddit.orgEnglish
      191·
      5 days ago

      Well, Belgium has three official languages, it just happens to share them with its neighbors. Ireland also has two, Luxembourg three, Malta two…

      Also Catalan is spoken as a first language by about 4 million people. That is more than the population of the smallest 8 EU countries.

      If costs are a concern one could argue that all these countries shouldn’t have things translated into their national languages either. Especially when another official language could do the job. While we are at it, might as well tell the Scandinavian EU members to just learn German. The Baltic countries could just agree on one language. What is up with Slovakia, Slovenia and Czech Republic anyways. Just merge and agree on one language duuh…

      Political factors are also a major consideration. France, for instance, has a national policy against the recognition of domestic minority languages like Basque, Breton and Corsican.

      I think this is more of the real concern here.

      While Belgium, Cyprus, Portugal, the Netherlands, Romania and Slovakia supported granting EU recognition to the Spain’s additional official languages, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany and Sweden backed Italy’s demands for “further clarity on the costs and legal implications of the move.”

      Belgium needs to balance Flanders and Wallonia. Cyprus has its Greek-Turkish situation with Armenians and Maronites in the mix. I think there is some Slovakia vs. Czech Republic beef from the separation of Czechoslovakia involved…

      • geissi@feddit.orgEnglish
        8·
        5 days ago

        Also Catalan is spoken as a first language by about 4 million people.

        That alone does not make a good reason. There are 12 million speakers of Bavarian. Should that also become an official EU language?

        Ned dass i do wos dagegn häd.

        • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
          1·
          3 days ago

          Bavarian is not a language but a dialect (group), same as Alamanian. Reason being that they do have a common Dachsprache (Standard German) that is of the same language group (High German).

          Contrast to Norwegian and Swedish which are more closely related than Bavarian is to Alamanian, but do not have a Dachsprache they could be dialect of, thus they’re languages. Then there’s Low Saxon which does share a Dachsprache with Bavarian and Alamanian (unless it uses Dutch as Dachsprache), but is more closely related to English than to Standard German.

          In short: If you want to be more than a dialect you have to stop speaking Standard.

        • Saleh@feddit.orgEnglish
          5·
          5 days ago

          Catalan is recognized as a language. For Bavarian it is contested and the majority of scholars consider it a dialect rather than language

          Bavarian is commonly considered to be a dialect of German,[6][7][8] but some sources classify it as a separate language: the International Organization for Standardization has assigned a unique ISO 639-3 language code (bar),[9] and the UNESCO lists Bavarian in the Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger since 2009; however, the classification of Bavarian as an individual language has been criticized by some scholars of Bavarian.[10][11]

          Reasons why Bavarian can be viewed as a dialect of German include the perception of its speakers, the lack of standardization, the traditional use of Standard German as a roofing language, the relative closeness to German which does not justify Bavarian to be viewed as an abstand language, or the fact that no country applied for Bavarian to be entered into the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages.[12][13]

          However if Bavaria would pay for it, i wouldn’t mind them having EU documents translated too. However i doubt that they would want that, as their own laws are written in standards German and they would have to teach their entire legal system to also be able to read and write in Bavarian. This would be quite hilarious as the Bavarians would fail in their own supposed language, showing that the 12 million speakers are more casual dialect speakers instead of actually proficient in what is supposed to bei “their” language.

        • Blaze (he/him)@piefed.socialEnglish
          1·
          4 days ago

          Is Bavarian an official language of Bavaria? Are children taught in Bavarian most of their classes, are laws published in Bavarian, are movies released in Bavarian?

          All of these are true for Catalan.

            • Blaze (he/him)@piefed.socialEnglish
              2·
              4 days ago

              Is there a movement in Bavaria to get the language recognized as an EU language?

              From what I’ve read, Bavarian seems to be mostly used for spoken communication, not written.

              The Bavarian wikipedia project has 27k articles: https://bar.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Hoamseitn

              The Catalan one has 774k: https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portada

              There is a TV channel in Catalan (https://www.3cat.cat/tv3/), and several newspapers written in that language (https://www.elnacional.cat/)

              I couldn’t find anything similar for Bavarian. https://www.br.de/index.html seems to be in German.

              It also seems like children aren’t taught in school in Bavarian, which makes quite a difference about passing the language to the newer generations and people who don’t speak it at home.

              I’m not saying that the number of speakers isn’t a good reason, more that different languages are used in different context. Someone in Catalunya could live their own lives only in Catalan. Not sure if that’s possible with Bavarian in Bavaria.

              • geissi@feddit.orgEnglish
                3·
                3 days ago

                I’m not saying that the number of speakers isn’t a good reason

                No I’m saying the number of speakers ALONE isn’t a good reason and you listing a myriad of reasons beyond just the number of speakers that you think Bavarian doesn’t fulfill just further proves my point.

                • Blaze (he/him)@piefed.socialEnglish
                  1·
                  3 days ago

                  Those aspects were already listed in the above comment, so not sure what point you are proving.

                  Curious why you don’t want to answer my questions about the use of Bavarian, I was genuinely curious about it.

    • Blaze (he/him)@piefed.socialEnglish
      11·
      5 days ago

      Galician gets official EU language status, but a regional language in another EU member that has official status at a national level doesn’t.

      At least Catalan (not sure about Galician or Basque) is a bit different from other regional languages. The education system in Spain is federated to regions, so children in Catalunya speak Catalan most of the time, Castillano/Spanish being a second language. In comparison, the French education system is monolithic, so all French children learn in French. There are a few schools who speak Breton or Catalan, but those are really minorities compared to Spain. Even from an official perspective, Breton or Catalan are not official languages of their regions in France.

      EDIT: Maybe Spain could just commit to internally providing and funding Catalan, Basque, and Galician translations of EU official documents, as that wouldn’t require sign-off from other EU members.

      That probably wouldn’t be enough. Catalan, Basque and Galician speakers also ask for the right of their representatives to speak their languages at the European Parliament and other instances, which requires translators from those languages to all of the other languages.

      Also, about the cost, the EU pays for translators for Irish, which has less than 2 millions L2 speakers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_language), Latvian with 1.5 millions speakers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latvian_language), Maltese with less than 600,000 speakers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maltese_language), why wouldn’t the EU pay for Catalan, which has 4 millions of L1 speakers, and 5 millions of L2 speakers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_language)?

      If the argument is “yes, but they are their own country”, then that’s just going to give ammunition to the Catalan independentists.

    • Obelix@feddit.orgEnglish
      52·
      5 days ago

      The biggest issue here is that (nearly) all EU documents have to be translated into all official EU languages. It will be really expensive if spain introduces new official languages due to all the translators needed