"EU edict on food labeling seen as English attack on culture"

[Mike Yared]

EU edict on food labeling seen as English attack on culture
Andrew Borowiec THE WASHINGTON TIMES Published 8/4/2002

PARIS -- France and the European Union are on a collision
course over whether French will continue to be acceptable
for labeling food products sold elsewhere in Europe.
European civil servants in Brussels recently ruled that
labels "in a language easier understood by consumers"
than French are preferred. To all concerned, that means
English. French patriots immediately saw a plot to
enhance the "hegemony of the Anglo-American world" and
some wrote of an alarming trend toward a fast-food
product vocabulary brought to Europe by "les
Anglo-Saxons." What is even more dramatic to French
purists is the threat that French culinary delicacies
such as boeuf bourguignon, branddade de morue or Haehis
parmentier, easily available throughout Europe, will have
to be translated into English. Labels on chicken wings,
coleslaw and spare ribs will need no translation. "France
has lost the right to defend its language," headlined the
respected daily Le Figaro. According to Clide Duneton, a
writer and expert on the French language, the EU decision
on food labeling is part of the "latent war by supporters
of the use of one language which cannot be anything but
English." And that, he said, will divide Europe into two
camps, one that understands English and one that does
not, "creating an Anglophone elite and condemning the
other to illiteracy." Unless France bows to the latest EU
decree -- soon to be made obligatory -- it will be
considered in contempt. However, French legal experts
have come up with a novel defense by accusing the EU
Commission of violating an earlier accord to something
called the "enriching factor" in the forging of European
unity. To the French, linguistic diversity makes Europe a
better place. Yves Marek, adviser to the French Senate
and author of an earlier law on food labeling, insists
that the protection of national languages "has been
enshrined in EU laws." France, he said, should not fight
a defensive, rear-guard action on the subject of food
labeling "but should demand the withdrawal of a plan
which in effect weakens the objective of European unity."
Newspaper editorials described the latest EU initiative
as "an attack on cultural diversity, an act of
hypocrisy." If France capitulates, wrote Le Figaro, "the
outcome will not only affect food labeling, it would mean
that the defenders of the French language have suffered a
defeat likely to be exploited by its adversaries." The
"battle of labeling" goes back to 1992, when France
banned the use of English in advertising some food items.
The European Commission subsequently decided that "the
defense of national languages would help the construction
of Europe." The latest EU edict specifies that no country
should "impose" its language on food products but should
use the language most understood across Europe. As it is
unlikely that Greek, Finnish, Portuguese or Flemish are
in that category, the wrath of the French turned upon
English. The French were not appeased when the European
Union added a clause specifying that labels in English
should be accompanied by a picture of the product. The
battle is not over, and France plans to carry it to the
European Court of Justice.

http://www.washtimes.com/world/default-20028402536.htm

[Steve Harr]

Mike Yared wrote in message
<3cb2978.0208120725.6aa9a698@posting.google.com>...
>EU edict on food labeling seen as English attack on culture
>Andrew Borowiec THE WASHINGTON TIMES Published 8/4/2002
>
> PARIS -- France and the European Union are on a
> collision course over whether French will continue to be
> acceptable for labeling food products sold elsewhere in
> Europe. European civil servants in Brussels recently
> ruled that labels "in a language easier understood by
> consumers" than French are preferred. To all concerned,
> that means English.

COMMENT

As it does to international airline pilots, who must all
communicate in English. The French aren't going to change
that, either.

> "France has lost the right to defend its language,"
> headlined the respected daily Le Figaro.

COMMENT: Don't tell me this headline was in English?

> According to Clide Duneton, a writer and expert on the
> French language, the EU decision on food labeling is
> part of the "latent war by supporters of the use of one
> language which cannot be anything but English."

He said that in French, one would hope, and you're giving a
very good and zingy English translation. Otherwise one would
suspect him of trying to use the language in which the most
people would understand him, for maximal political effect, and
not using French. Which wouldn't be very wise of him, given
his premise.

This reminds me of the anti "US-English" people who deny that
not having good English skills is a political handicap to
anybody-- yet who campaign for that position before the
California legislature in *English,* not Spanish. No sense of
humor or irony at all.

> And that, he said, will divide Europe into two camps,
> one that understands English and one that does not,
> "creating an Anglophone elite and condemning the other
> to illiteracy."

Already happened. All you can do with non-English labeling is
make it worse and last longer. If you only speak
Serbo-Croation or Gujarati or Tagalog or whatever, you're
going to have a harder time in this world than if you speak
the language that more of Earth's people speak than any other.

Look at your labels now. Notice that we "Anglophones" already
gave up our own system of weights and measures for what
essentially started out as the French one, simply in order to
promote the single system in which the most people would be
understood (find me a food label that doesn't have weights in
grams--- even in the US). And the whole world did the same,
when it came to Arabic numerals vs Roman or whatever. History
won out for those systems. The frigging French can recognize
this, and bite the same bullet when it comes to language.

--
I welcome email from any being clever enough to fix my
address. It's open book. A prize to the first spambot that
passes my Turing test.

[Al Hephy]

Yes. But first everyone is supposed to kick up a fuss :-)

Al

Steve Harris <sbharris@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote in
message = news:aju79q$ro7$1@slb3.atl.mindspring.net...
> Mike Yared wrote in message
> <3cb2978.0208120725.6aa9a698@posting.google.com>...
> >EU edict on food labeling seen as English attack on culture
> >Andrew Borowiec THE WASHINGTON TIMES Published 8/4/2002
> >
> > PARIS -- France and the European Union are on a
> > collision course over whether French will continue to
> > be acceptable for labeling food products sold
> > elsewhere in Europe. European civil servants in
> > Brussels recently ruled that labels "in a language
> > easier understood by consumers" than French are
> > preferred. To all concerned, that means English.
>=20
> COMMENT
>=20
> As it does to international airline pilots, who must all
> communicate =
in
> English. The French aren't going to change that, either.
>=20 20 20
> > "France has lost the right to defend its language,"
> > headlined the respected daily Le Figaro.
>=20 20
> COMMENT: Don't tell me this headline was in English?
>=20 20 20
> > According to Clide Duneton, a writer and expert on
> > the French language, the EU decision on food labeling
> > is part of the "latent war by supporters of the use
> > of one language which cannot be anything but
> > English."
>=20
> He said that in French, one would hope, and you're giving a
> very good =
and
> zingy English translation. Otherwise one would expect him of
> trying to =
use
> the language in which the most people would understand
> him, for =
maximal
> political effect, and not using French. Which wouldn't be
> very wise of =
him,
> given his premise.
>=20
> This reminds me of the anti "US-English" people who deny
> that not =
having
> good English skills is a political handicap to anybody--
> yet who =
campaign
> for that position before the California legislature in
> *English,* not Spanish. No sense of humor or irony at all.
>=20 20
> > And that, he said, will divide Europe into two camps,
> > one that understands English and one that does not,
> > "creating an Anglophone elite and condemning the
> > other to illiteracy."
>=20
> Already happened. All you can do with non-English labeling
> is make it =
worse
> and last longer. If you only speak Serbo-Croation or
> Gujarati or =
Tagalog or
> whatever, you're going to have a harder time in this world
> than if you =
speak
> the language that more of Earth's people speak than
> any other.
>=20
> Look at your labels now. Notice that we "Anglophones"
> already gave up =
our
> own system of weights and measures for what essentially
> started out as =
the
> French one, simply in order to promote the single system in
> which the =
most
> people would be understood (find me a food label that
> doesn't have =
weights
> in grams--- even in the US). And the whole world did the
> same, when it =
came
> to Arabic numerals vs Roman or whatever. History won out
> for those =
systems.
> The frigging French can recognize this, and bite the same
> bullet when =
it
> comes to language.
>=20 20
> --
> I welcome email from any being clever enough to fix my
> address. It's =
open
> book. A prize to the first spambot that passes my
> Turing test.
>=20 20 20

[Hanson]

Right now it is August 20, 2002 4:40 PM wow...he's is from the
future.....

----- Original Message ----- From: "Happy Dog"
<happydog@no#%^spam.sympatico.ca> Newsgroups:
sci.med.nutrition,sci.physics,sci.med Sent: Wednesday, August
28, 2002 3:20 PM Subject: Re: "EU edict on food labeling seen
as English attack on culture"

"Happy Dog" <happydog@no#%^spam.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:%hz89.11987$Px3.766918@news20.bellglobal.com...
> "Steve Harris" <sbharris@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com> wrote
> in message news:aju7jg$hi8$1@slb0.atl.mindspring.net...
> > Mike Yared wrote in message
> > > PARIS -- France and the European Union are on a
> > > collision course over whether French will continue
> > > to be acceptable for labeling food products sold
> > > elsewhere in Europe.

[jsavard]

Steve Harris (sbharris@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com) wrote:
: Mike Yared wrote in message

well, he quoted:
: > European civil servants in Brussels recently ruled
: > that labels "in a language easier understood by
: > consumers" than French are preferred. To all
: > concerned, that means English.

: As it does to international airline pilots, who must all
: communicate in English. The French aren't going to change
: that, either.

Actually, I'm quite puzzled. I should think that if French
food is sold in Italy, it had better be labelled in Italian.
If French food is sold in Holland, it had better be labelled
in Dutch. In either case, labelling the food in French,
English, or, for that matter, in Egyptian hieroglyphics,
Armenian, or Chinese, would be equally effective.

While English _is_ the world's most popular second language,
and it is true Europeans are more likely to understand foreign
languages than Americans are, assuming everybody in Europe
understands English is still, I should think, rather
over-optimistic.

John Savard

[John 'The]

Once upon a time, our fellow jsavard@ecn.ab.ca () rambled on
about "Re: "EU edict on food labeling seen as English attack
on culture"." Our champion De-Medicalizing in
sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

>While English _is_ the world's most popular second language,
>and it is true Europeans are more likely to understand
>foreign languages than Americans are, assuming everybody in
>Europe understands English is still, I should think, rather
>over-optimistic.

Well, I have a comment on your rather stupid comment on this
rather stupid THREAD.

Doesn't "EU" mean one, rather than many?

Doesn't "EU" mean one united country rather than one many
separate states?

One kind of implies one language don't it, Dolt? What is truly
stupid is even considering whether or not everybody in Europe
understands English.

Hark! My private health newsgroup beckons!
--
John Gohde, Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a Science!

The nutrition of eating a healthy diet is the foundation of
the biomedical model of natural health. Weighing in at 17
webpages, Nutrition (www.Food.NaturalHealthPerspective.com/)
is now with more documentation and sharper terminology than
ever before.

[Richard To]

In article <pr09mu4h3vu2ht3b442ajrp49ohbh24jo9@4ax.com>, John
'the Man' <DeMan[81]@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Doesn't "EU" mean one united country

No. It is a union of countries.

>One kind of implies one language don't it

Of course, and one height, one sex, one newsgroup.

-- Richard
--
Spam filter: to mail me from a .com/.net site, put my surname
in the headers.

FreeBSD rules!

[John 'The]

Once upon a time, our fellow Richard Tobin rambled on about
"Re: "EU edict on food labeling seen as English attack on
culture"." Our champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition
retorts, thusly ...

>Of course, and one height, one sex, one newsgroup.

Why else would this THREAD be even posted in a nutrition ng?