Over the last century various ethnic groups have become more aware of their identity and rights.
In some countries ethnic minority groups have demanded the right to education, media and other
services in their own languages, at times leading to armed conflict with the majority groups in
their countries. In the last few decades contact between nations has increased, as more and
more countries take an active – and interactive – role in international affairs. Both of these
processes have led to an awareness of linguistic rights as human rights. At the same time as
English has gained currency as an international language and as the most commonly used
diplomatic language, international organisations are recognising the various languages of
member states as official or working languages
for their proceedings, both oral and written. In Documents exchanged between countries in the past were written in the single vehicular language then in use in Europe: Latin. In the 18th century French had become the generally accepted diplomatic language, so much so that even diplomatic notes addressed to the British Foreign Office by the Legation of the USA were written in that language. The 20th century saw a gradual emergence of English as a second and later even dominant diplomatic language. At the same time, a growing number of countries insisted on the use of their own language in diplomatic correspondence and joint diplomatic documents. As a result the United Nations admitted to five languages at its inception (Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish), to which Arabic has later been added by informal agreement. In the European Union, all twelve languages of the members are currently in use and their number is bound to grow as new members will be admitted. Translation and interpretation have therefore become a major element in present-day diplomatic life. ("Texts in Diplomacy," Language and Diplomacy, Malta: DiploProjects, 2001)
Dr Stanko Nick, Croatian Ambassador to Hungary, makes the point that although it has frequently been argued that one language or another is more suitable for diplomacy as it is clearer, more flexible, more expressive, or more eloquent, the “mere fact that historically such a role has been taken in turns by so many languages (Acadian, literary Chinese, Greek "koin`e", mediaeval Greek, Latin, Arabic, Turkish, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, Italian, Dutch, German, French, and English) proves that linguistic or semantic reasons are not decisive. On the contrary, it can be said that the dominant role of one language or another in diplomacy has resulted from the political, strategic, economic, cultural or other domination of one power or another in international relations.” ("Use
of Language in Diplomacy," Language and Diplomacy,
Malta: DiploProjects, 2001) |
