The debate on the European Enlargement to East and Central Europe and the negotiations with presently thirteen and possibly more countries later, raise a cultural problem at large, briefly summarized by two questions: what do we have in common? And what is the European identity? Practically it raises the problem of what language will we speak? The paper, written by an anthropologist, is based on extensive periods of observation of EU institutional life and several months of participation to the Commission working operations. It intends to clarify the linguistic situation of the EU, considered as a political entity, by making explicit the relations between three articulated layers that are: the realm of an official polity, the world of the institutions, and society at large. Within the general context of EU making, I distinguish the problematic of the official European languages policy, the use of languages that is made by European officials and their impact on policy making, and the delicate shifting from monolingualism to multilingualism in a social context. The EU destiny is to carry together two antagonistic perspectives such as Unity and Diversity, which constitute its motto. Diversity is at the core of the European identity and within the institutional process itself, bringing, in terms of language, interesting issues for improving communication, through translation, interpretation and personal attitudes. Progresses towards the forms of unity that represent the integration policies and the adoption of a single currency do not lead simply to a linguistic unification, nor to the adoption of English as a common vehicular language. European elite (usually trained in English) and people (located in their own multiple languages) do not live identical linguistic situations. What is at stake is the possibility for individuals to manage several languages for being really part of a European space, which does not limit itself to national and regional boundaries.
(1992) La vie quotidienne au Parlement Européen, Hachette, Paris.
Abélès, M, Bellier, I., McDonald, M.
(1993), An anthropological approach to the European Commission, mimeo, Brussels.
Abélès et Bellier
(1996) “La Commission Européenne: du compromis culturel à la culture politique du compromis”, Revue Française de Science Politique, vol 461, n°3, 431–455.
Appadurai Arjun
(1996) Modernity at large, Cultural Dimensions of Globalization, New Deli, Sage University Press, et Oxford, Oxford University Press (1996, first edition, the Regents of Minnesota Press).
Bellier I.
(1999) “European Institutions and Linguistic Diversity: a Problematic Unity” in Chopra, H.S., Frank, R., Schröder, J.National Identities and Regional Cooperation: experiences of European Integration and South Asia Perceptions, Manohar, New Delhi.
(
2001) “Between ‘Transparency’ and ‘opacity’: Official Communication in New Europe”. in R. de Cillia, H.-J. Krumm, R. Wodak (Hrsg) Loss of Communication in the Information Age, Wien, Autriche.
Bellier I. and Wilson Th.
2000, « Building, Imagining, Experiencing Europe: institutions and identities in the European Union »introduction, An Anthropology of the European Union: Building, imagining, experiencing Europe, Bellier I. & Wilson (eds), Berg 2000.
Born J.
(1996) « O Futuro das Linguas Estransgeiras em Instituçoes Internacionais: Uniao Européia e Mercosul », Revista da Comunicaçao, N°21 96/2: 41–52.
Keohane R. O. et Hoffman S.
(dir) 1991, The new european Community. Decision making and institutional change, Boulder, San Francisco, Oxford, Westview Press.
La Guérivière Jean de
(1993), Voyage à l’intérieur de l’Eurocratie, Editions du Monde, Paris.
Monnet, J.
(1975) Mémoires d’Europe, Paris Fayard.
Mullen, P. F.
(2000), « So you hear what I hear? Translation, Expansion, and crisis in the European, Court of Justice ». in Maria Green Cowles and Michael Smith, The State of the European Union, vol 51, Risks, Reform, Resistance and Revival, Oxford, OUP.
Neveu C.
(2000) «European citizenship, citizens of Europe and European citizens». in Bellier I. & Wilson (eds), An Anthropology of the European Union: Building, imagining, experiencing Europe, Berg 2000.
Swaan, A. de
(2002) Words of the world: The global language system, Polity Press, Cambridge.
Wright S.
(1999) « A Community that can communicate? The linguistic factor in European integration ». in Dennis Smith and Sue Wright, Whose Europe? The turn towards democracy, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Cited by
Cited by 10 other publications
Andreenkova, Anna V.
2018. How to Choose Interview Language in Different Countries. In Advances in Comparative Survey Methods, ► pp. 293 ff.
Antonsich, Marco
2008. EUropean attachment and meanings of EUrope. A qualitative study in the EU-15. Political Geography 27:6 ► pp. 691 ff.
Carta, Caterina
2015. The swinging “we”. Journal of Language and Politics 14:1 ► pp. 65 ff.
Cheruvu, Sivaram
2019. How do institutional constraints affect judicial decision-making? The European Court of Justice’s French language mandate. European Union Politics 20:4 ► pp. 562 ff.
Firat, Bilge
2013. Failed promises: economic integration, bureaucratic encounters, and the EU-Turkey Customs Union. Dialectical Anthropology 37:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Krzyżanowski, Michał
2011. Political communication, institutional cultures and linearities of organisational practice: a discourse-ethnographic approach to institutional change in the European Union. Critical Discourse Studies 8:4 ► pp. 281 ff.
2011. Hybrid Texts and Uniform Law? The Multilingual Case Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 24:1 ► pp. 97 ff.
McAuliffe, Karen
2013. The Limitations of a Multilingual Legal System. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 26:4 ► pp. 861 ff.
Wodak, Ruth
2008. Introduction: Discourse Studies — Important Concepts and Terms. In Qualitative Discourse Analysis in the Social Sciences, ► pp. 1 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.