Social-economic development of a country is a challenging and dynamic process; in many ways, its success depends on assistance from the international community represented by a number of organizations dealing with development-related issues. These organizations include the UN system, World Bank, U. S. Agency for International Development (USAID), European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), Asian Development Bank (ADB), etc. activities of these organizations are reflected» in various documents, such as statutory and declaratory documents, reports, newsletters, etc. Translation of these documents is a relevant and responsible task, which should be fulfilled carefully. However, adequate translation does not always guarantee correct understanding of some development aspects. The reason for that is the special style of these documents, which present-day mass media labeled as the “development language/jargon.”
Why is it so important to understand this language correctly? The open letter to Kofi Annan, the seventh Secretary-General of the United Nations, from Carbon Trade Watch, Delhi Forum and other organizations as of February 15, 2005 on climate change says:
“… a smokescreen of specialized “carbon market” jargon has prevented the public from understanding or exercising control over climate policy”. [1]
Let alone that carbon financing is a new element of interstate trade and can hardly be overemphasized. Behind the “veil” of the development language, there is information on events in social and economic sectors, where international organizations often implement various projects.
John Y. Jones stated: “Anyone who has learnt to decipher the development jargon will immediately see that this is produced in the offices of the IMF, WB and OECD.” [2]
All important achievements in the area of development are covered by mass media, which also actively use the development jargon that their audience finds difficult to understand. David Bathur noted: “To journalists, development jargon is the grim offspring of social science terminology and quasi-political speak. How many people outside of development actually know what capacity-building and institutional strengthening is”? [3]
In addition, of note is the fact that in English these expressions remain unchanged while in Russian they are translated differently, which does not contribute to their correct understanding as well.
Let us consider some characteristics of the style of the international organizations’ language using the UN documents as an example. This style is a version of the official functional style with some elements of the journalistic style. Its characteristics are segmentations into paragraphs, specific grammatical patterns, compositional elements, selection of vocabulary, a trend towards economical use of linguistic means (cliche). Structural and logical segmentation of texts is based on emphasizing major logical parts (a preamble, a core and a final part in the UN documents); each of them includes smaller components, which in writing are represented as numbered chapters, articles and items. Given the characteristics of the functional style of the UN documents, the smallest structural unit of the logical segmentation is an item (a paragraph). Coherence in the UN documents is ensured by formal means, which are well-known in linguistics. They include consistency of aspectual-temporal forms of verbs, lexical reiterations, modality, pronouns, etc. There is almost no use of synonymy to build sentence connections due to the need for maximum accuracy and prevention of possible equivocal interpretations of a document. For this reason, pronouns are used only when their meaning in the text is unambiguous. Major formal means most often used to ensure coherence in micro-texts, which form the UN documents, first of all include lexical reiterations.
One should also note image-bearing vocabulary and expressions frequently used in documents of international organizations.
David Bathur further stresses: “It is the responsibility of development practitioners to de-code their terminology for the general public. A media release saturated with jargon and catchwords communicates nothing.” [3]
In fact, numerous “catchwords/catchphrases” and “buzzwords” are integral to the development jargon. Let us consider the most popular expression used by international organizations — “sustainable development”. This expression causes mixed reactions in up-to-date publications. “Sustainability, like many buzzwords in development jargon, is suffering from overuse.” [4] People call it “the UN’s favorite mantra” and complain against its inaccurate translation that distorts its meaning.
Why did the concept “sustainable development” originate? Where did it come from? “Sustainable development” is an English term, which initially had emerged in environmental management and was subsequently translated into Russian as “устойчивое развитие”. This expression was coined by people engaged in fishery management in Canada in mid-XX century. That is how they named a system for using fish resources when these resources are not depleted, and fishing matches the capacity for simple reproduction of relevant population. Yet, a century before the Canadian fishermen, the same idea was proposed by the German wood-growers but for different resources and in a different language: what they meant is a system of forest use when the forest is preserved, cutting does not exceed the yield, and the cutting areas are organized in such a manner when the forest ecosystem reproduces itself without losses. Under such systems — in both fishery and forestry — use of resources can continue forever if no outside factors interfere.
This is still quite far from the present-day interpretation of this concept; even this initial meaning was lost in many international documents. “Sustainable development” has become a buzzword which too often is used without any idea of what it means or may mean. It is just a modern jargon and a tribute to fashion.
From nature management, where this term was used mainly for local ecosystems, “sustainable development” was transferred to the global environmental science. Since 1980s it has been introduced into scientific discourse; it became widely accepted after the Brundtland Commission (Gro Harlem Brundtland — a Norwegian politician, who served as the Minister of the Environment in 1980s, then as the Prime Minister of Norway and as the Director-General of the World Health Organization in 1998–2003) had used it. This Commission was set up by the UN because some 10 years after the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm in 1972 it became clear that the world development was inconsistent with the decisions reached at this Conference. A task was set before this commission: analyze the situation, assess the trends and maybe even develop some constructive proposals. In 1987, after several years’ work the Commission concluded that it was not possible to address environmental issues in isolation from social and economic issues; sustainability in environment is not enough, and sustainable development needed to be discussed in a broader context. The Commission submitted to the UN a comprehensive report titled “Our Common Future”; it was translated into Russian in 1989. It gives the following definition: “Sustainable development” is such a development when “it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” [5, p.8]
The term “sustainable development” entered the global orbit after the Conference in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992. The Conference was timed to coincide with the 20th anniversary of the Stockholm Conference. If the Stockholm Conference was titled the “United Nations Conference on the Human Environment”, then in Rio the range of issues was broader and the Conference was titled the “United Nations Conference on Environment and Development.” The following conference was planned specifically on sustainable development and was titled the “World Summit on Sustainable Development” and held in Johannesburg in 2002.
There is a common perception that sustainable development is a self-contradictory concept. Also, there is an opinion that, first, in Russian “устойчивое развитие” is mistranslation of the English term “sustainable development” and, second, development cannot be sustainable as a matter of principle.
“Someone has carelessly translated… “sustainable development” as “устойчивое развитие” and disoriented everyone. It is sustainable in the sense that it does not rock the boat where all the humanity sits, while [many people] understand it as continuous development without recession, which was never meant.” [6]
As for translation, in this case, it is very difficult to find an appropriate concise equivalent, and if the wording is not concise it will be a comment rather than a term. Thus the most important point is what we will agree to understand by this concept.
Many present-day publications share an opinion that the concept “sustainable development”, even if it is valid for environment, should not be used in other sectors — social, economic, demographic, health, etc. — since it is not justified theoretically. In other words, can we discuss various aspects of our life, other than the environmental ones, in the context of sustainability and sustainable development? We think that we can and we even need to. We only need to agree what we will mean by this. The following definition seems quite adequate to us: “sustainable development” is such a development of society when its natural foundation is not disrupted, the created living conditions do not result in human degradation, and the social processes never reach the level when they pose a threat to public security.
At the same time, it should be kept in mind that “sustainable development” is still development, which means economic growth and productivity gains to meet the needs of the population. In another important publication “Blueprint for a green economy” (Pearce, D., Markandya A. & Barbier, E.B., 1989.) the notion “sustainability” is discussed as a “reproductive capacity”. It means the ability of ecosystems to adapt to changes. It is vital for success of manmade ecosystems, like agriculture and livestock production, where human activities aim to purposefully change an ecosystem to produce food. There is a need not only to mitigate impact of agriculture and livestock production on the environment in particular, but also to improve productivity at the same time to meet the growing needs of the population and the demand for livestock products — “and to do it in ways that are sustainable.” [4]
We have considered only one expression from the development jargon. This example shows how important it is to ensure correct translation of a term and understanding of its meaning, and how easy it is to distort its meaning. Undoubtedly, we need to make sure we get quality translation into Russian of the documents produced by international organizations. Otherwise, the public at large will not be able to track the trends in social and economic development because it will be lost in the development jargon which is clear only to a limited number of experts. That is why it is essential that the modern development language be analyzed; it is challenging, multifaceted and diverse — from emotional and image-bearing jargon to concise and barren style of the UN documents. Then this language should be made clear to the public at large.
References:
- http://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2005/02/15/Outside-View-Letter-to-Kofi-Annan/79201108505761/
- John Y. Jones. “IFIs and the MDGs: Abusing the Poor over again. How the IFIs stole the development agenda and made the MDGs a tool for pushing neoliberalism”
- David Bathur. “Drop The Jargon, Spread The Word. NGOs need to make it simple.”
- Andrew Speedy. “Farmers, their animals and the environment”. World Animal Review FAO, Rome. http://www.fao.org/docrep/x3770t/x3770t01.htm
- WorlCd Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our common future. Oxford, UK, Oxford University Press.
- Михаил Арапов. “Наш великий и могучий...”. “Знамя” 2006, № 2, http://magazines.russ.ru/znamia/2006/2/ara10-pr.html
