
European Parliament publishes a corrigendum to the GDPR - raleighm
https://www.technologylawdispatch.com/2018/06/privacy-data-protection/european-parliament-publishes-a-corrigendum-to-the-gdpr/
======
protomyth
Hold up, there are _26 “official” language versions of the GDPR_? How does
that work in practice? It would seem that no matter how well researched there
is a possible meaning mismatch when you cross languages.

~~~
oh_sigh
> EU law currently applies to 27 countries and is available in 23 languages
> which all carry equal status. In practice, this is achieved though
> translation and by the work of the DGT (Directorate General Translation),
> which hosts the largest translation service in the world. But from a legal
> point of view, translation is institutionally ‗non-existent‘ and EU
> languages are all equal and authentic. The issue has been given attention in
> the last two decades mostly from scholars, linguists and translators
> (Correia 2003, Kjær 1999, Koskinen 2000, Ńarčević 2001, Tosi 2001, Wagner
> 2000), thus raising awareness on the paradox of translation and the lack of
> a proper EU language policy and legal culture

Source(pdf):
[https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/cl/article/download/698...](https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/cl/article/download/6984/6983)

~~~
vilhelm_s
The specific part about interpreting laws says

> The Court of Justice arbitrates on Community law and pursues a particular,
> but no less rigorous application of multilingualism. ... each authentic text
> is considered independent for the purpose of interpretation by the courts
> and despite being translations, judgements and other documents are deemed to
> be authentic only if they are the language of the case. On the other hand,
> as none of them prevails and they all have the same meaning, whenever
> linguistic divergence or ambiguity arises, the European Court of Justice
> consults all the texts of a given instrument on a routine basis.
> Interpreting the intended meaning of the single instrument is given priority
> over any linguistic discrepancies and this is why revisers and translators
> of the European Court of Justice need to be lawyers.

