scholarly journals Multilingual Legal Drafting, Translators’ Choices and the Principle of Lesser Evil

2014 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karolina Stefaniak

Usually the quality of EU translations is not a prominent topic in the public sphere, and when it is brought up as an issue, it is mostly criticized in the context of its allegedly high costs and the apparently low quality. The critics, however, are often unaware of the motives behind the particular translation choices, which they perceive as awkward, unusual or simply wrong. This article argues that these choices result from the particular position of translation in respect to the process of legal drafting in the EU and that of translators in respect to the draftspersons, which results not only in intellectual, but also in ethical dilemmas of the translators. It is further argued that what may be considered an error from an outsider’s point of view is actually a conscious choice made by a translator trying to reconcile various divergent interests.

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 11-27
Author(s):  
Karrar Imad Abdulsahib Al-Shammari

The subject of halal slaughtering is one of the most widely discussed issues of animal cruelty and animal welfare in the public sphere. The discrepancy in understanding the contemporary and religious laws pertaining to animal slaughtering does not fully publicize to Islamic and Muslim majority countries especially with respect to interpreting the use of stunning in animals. The electrical stunning is the cheapest, easiest, safest, and most suitable method for slaughtering that is widespread and developed. However, stunning on head of poultry before being slaughtered is a controversial aspect among the Islamic sects due to regulations of the European Union and some other countries. The current review highlights the instructions of halal slaughtering, legal legislation, and the effect of this global practice on poultry welfare and the quality of produced meat.


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (03) ◽  
pp. E
Author(s):  
Frank Kupper ◽  
Carolina Moreno-Castro ◽  
Alessandra Fornetti

Science communication continues to grow, develop and change, as a practice and field of research. The boundaries between science and the rest of society are blurring. Digitalization transforms the public sphere. This JCOM special issue aims to rethink science communication in light of the changing science communication landscape. How to characterize the emerging science communication ecosystem in relation to the introduction of new media and actors involved? What new practices are emerging? How is the quality of science communication maintained or improved? We present a selection of papers that provide different perspectives on these questions and challenges.


2019 ◽  
pp. 146-172
Author(s):  
Paul Mutsaers

This concluding chapter synergizes the previous chapters and adds something new. Both functions are captured by the title, Reclaiming the Public in Policing. First, it argues that the empirical and conceptual work in this book points at the corrosion of the public character of policing, which results in law enforcement agencies that find it increasingly difficult to exclude politics, particularism, and populism from their operations. This part of the chapter concludes that it is imperative that we ‘unthink’ bureaucracy as the social evil of our time and revalue the public contours of policing. A second way to reclaim the ‘public’ in policing, now defined not as a quality of the police but an engaged citizenry that is involved in public debates on the police, concerns the role of police scholars in the public sphere. The chapter advocates a public anthropology of police and reflects on the author's efforts to ‘go public’.


2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 673-693 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mayte Peters

Democratically legitimized European integration calls for developments in culture and society—which arise naturally in the scope of on-going political, economic and institutional European Union (EU) integration—to be publically debated so they may be politically processed. The space where this happens is the public sphere, or, in the context of the EU, the European public sphere. The latter complements national public spheres. Successful integration among EU Member States is made possible by adhering to a common set of values at the same time as respecting the national identities of the Member States and fostering cultural diversity. By way of Union citizenship rights, individuals are able to make use of and actively promote the Europeanization of societies and cultures. Yet citizens are affected by Europeanization to differing degrees, with only a minority of citizens actively partaking in transnational exchange. In order to account for European integration democratically, the EU treaties hold provisions allowing for a close institutional interdependence of national and European democracy.


Daedalus ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 146 (3) ◽  
pp. 39-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard Manin

Retrieving an insight dating back to antiquity, this essay argues that the confrontation of opposing views and arguments is desirable in political deliberation. But freedom of speech and diversity among deliberators do not suffice to secure that outcome. Therefore we should actively facilitate and encourage the presentation of contrary opinions during deliberation. Such confrontation is our best means of improving the quality of collective decisions. It also counteracts the pernicious fragmentation of the public sphere. It facilitates the comprehension of choices. Lastly, arguing for and against a given decision treats the minority with respect. This essay proposes practical ways of promoting adversarial deliberation, in particular the organization of debates disconnected from electoral competition.


2019 ◽  
pp. 138-160
Author(s):  
Cristina Lafont

This chapter explores how we might institutionalize deliberative minipublics in order to serve genuinely democratic goals. In contrast to empowered uses of minipublics that would bypass the citizenry’s political deliberation, citizens could use minipublics for contestatory, vigilant, and anticipatory purposes. These uses of minipublics would improve the quality of deliberation in the public sphere and would also force the political system to take the high road of properly involving the citizenry in the political process. The chapter illustrates these potential forms of “deliberative activism” with the help of examples of actual deliberative polls that James Fishkin has conducted over several decades. This analysis shows how deliberative minipublics can help improve the democratic quality of political deliberation in the public sphere while strengthening citizens’ democratic control over political decisions.


2016 ◽  
Vol 115 (779) ◽  
pp. 83-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan-Werner Müller

The EU will not become something like a traditional nation-state anytime soon, and no supranational public sphere is likely to ever replace national public spheres.


Author(s):  
Amir Dedoe

This study aims to examine the meaning of the reality of individual social interest in body art tattooing or tattooing as an identity so that they bind themselves into a social community. Tattoos in Indonesia with the inherent negative stigmatization, have the complexity of debate in the dynamics of their presence in the public sphere. This paper presents one perspective, especially from the point of view of tattoo owners regarding their perceptions of the motives for tattooing that they do. By conducting observations and in-depth interviews in an effort to make a qualitative scientific explanation of the ownership motives of tattoos by community members. By triangulation techniques, the author builds a constructivist framework of the perception of tattoos in the community. This study found that a person's main motivation for having a tattoo is preceded by a desire to express artistic or artistic desires. When this accumulation of shared desires takes place, business motives and identity construction become a trigger for the formation of the tattoo community


Author(s):  
Dennis Lichtenstein

In research on the transnationalization of the public sphere, speakers are coded in claim analysis (Adam, 2007; Koopmans & Statham, 2010) and in research on European identity (Lichtenstein & Eilders, 2015, 2019). Speakers are politicians, societal actors or journalists who are given voice in a news story. In claim analyses, a speaker directs, for instance, a thematic demand or decision towards another actor. In research on European identity, speakers address an EU frame in a news story. The variable “speaker” provides a broad categorization of the first or most important speaker in an article. He or she is more precisely classified using further variables which target the actors’ degree of organization, his or her country of origin and his or her more detailed function within the EU or other international institutions.   Field of application/theoretical foundation: In research on the transnationalization of the public sphere, speakers are coded to measure interactions between countries (horizontal transnationalization) and to analyze the extent to which EU actors get a voice in the coverage of national media outlets (vertical transnationalization). They are also coded to analyze to which extent civil society actors are heard compared to politicians. The share of EU and international speakers differs between countries, media outlets, and policy fields. In research on European identity the variable additionally enables to differentiate between the kinds of speakers who are given a voice in the collective construction of European identity.   References/combination with other methods of data collection: Content analyses that examine the claims of speakers in transnational public spheres has been combined with interview studies with journalists, politicians, and interest groups (Koopmans & Statham, 2010).   Example study: Koopmans & Statham (2010)   Information on Koopmans & Statham, 2010 Authors: Ruud Koopmans, Paul Statham Research question/research interest: Analysis of the visibility of the EU level in the transnational public sphere, the inclusiveness of public demands, and public contestation regarding EU decision making Object of analysis: National quality newspaper, popular press, regional papers from seven countries Timeframe of analysis: 1990–2002   Information about variable Variable name/definition: speakers “If a claim has more than one actor (e.g., a coalition), the following priority rules apply: 1) actors mentioned in the article as 'leaders', 'organizers', 'spokespersons', etc. have priority, unless, of course, they do not make any claims; 2) organizations, institutions or representatives thereof (e.g., 'National Organization of Peasants') have priority over unorganized collectivities or individuals (e.g., 'peasants', 'farmer X'); 3) active actors or speakers have priority over passive audiences/rank-and-file participants (e.g., if a party representative addresses a crowd at a peace rally, the party representative has priority). If there are several actors or no actor at all who have priority according to these three criteria, the order in which they are mentioned in the article decides (with, again, the main headline as the start of the article). If of one physical actor two functions are mentioned, the highest level capacity in terms of the scope variable (see below) is coded. E.g., if the article says “Portuguese prime minister and current Chair of the EU Presidency Guttierez” would be code as “EU presidency” even if Portuguese prime minister would be mentioned first. However, the precondition would be that the EU presidency function is really mentioned in the article - that you know that the Portuguese prime minister is present Chair of the Council is not decisive, it should be explicitly mentioned. (…) Only if two capacities are at the same scope level the rule is that the first mentioned is coded.” (Koopmans, 2002, p. 24; https://europub.wzb.eu/Data/Codebooks%20questionnaires/D2-1-claims-codebook.pdf) Level of analysis: Claim Scale level: Nominal Reliability: 84%   References Koopmans, R. & Statham, P. (2010) (Eds.). The Making of a European Public Sphere. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document