How one Yorkshire company is helping businesses export to the EU

Yesterday I had the pleasure of opening the new premises of a pioneering young company, based in Salts Mill, just five minutes walk from where I live in Saltaire. It is The European Marketing Agency (TEMA)and which specialises in helping Yorkshire & Humber firms in accessing the European market by offering translation, interpretation, market support and advice.

Apparently, many firms, when they first begin to export, focus just on the English speaking world, believing that language and other barriers make it difficult to export to the rest of Europe. Yet we are part of the world's largest market offering us huge possibilities to export to other European countries - tariff free, quota free and with compatible regulations. TEMA helps small and medium sized enterprises overcome any linguistic or psychological barriers they have in accessing that huge market - and one whose purchasing power is, thanks to the soaring value of the euro against the pound, still growing, and right on our doorstep.

In just three years, TEMA has grown from a staff of three to a staff of over 30 and they offer services in almost every European language. They can be a catalyst for a huge expansion of Yorkshire & Humber exports to the rest of Europe.

The importance of Modern Foreign Languages

I have received the following message from a secondary school teacher in Grimsby called Pat Holland, which makes a well argued point about the worrying state of Modern Languages teaching in our schools, and deserves wider circulation:

"I am in my final year (before retirement) of teaching French and German and have found the last few years very depressing. It has seemed strangely ironic that under Blair, who was supposedly pro-Europe and a French speaker, language teaching shrank, became optional, and lost status and teaching time. When I complained about this to the education department I was told that introducing languages into primary schools was going to bring about a renaissance in MFL learning; sadly, I'm old enough to remember how little impact the Schools Council project made in primary schools in the 70s, and how badly delivered it was by inexpert teachers. Although current colleagues in the primary sector seem full of good will and enthusiasm, the vicious circle of neglect of language teaching means that few of them have good enough language skills to deliver the curriculum effectively.

As I'm sure you're aware, MFL teachers play a most crucial role in teaching tolerance of other cultures. The rapid disappearance of German from state schools means we no longer have a chance to counter lingering prejudices from World War Two, and the lack of exchanges brought about by health and safety fears and the expense of covering teachers means that pupils now miss out on a life-changing experience which teaches self-reliance, linguisitic skill and tolerance. Reduced lesson time (in my school now only two hours per week) means that we have less time for songs, sketches and other creative activities.... All of this depresses me greatly, because it seems that MFL are becoming the preserve of Grammar and Public schools, and that a broad curriculum for all is a dead concept in comprehensive schools, to which so many of us 'baby-boomers' devoted our careers."

A tribute to the linguists

The European Parliament couldn't cope without its interpreters and translators, diligently rendering our best and worst prose into other languages. They are taken for granted most of the time, beavering away behind glass (interpreters at meetings - whom we can at least see) or at distance (translators of texts - whom we rarely meet), though the occasional mistake can give rise to much confusion. It is also not unknown for Members to blame the linguists for their own mistakes, or to get out of a tight corner ("I didn't really call you an XXX - honest - it must have been a mistake by the interpreter!").

But just how skillful a job it is has just been brought home to me again by looking at the translation of my own report on the Lisbon Treaty, especially the "Explanatory Statement", which is annexed to the motion for resolution as background and is not voted on by Parliament, standing as an informal explanatory briefing by the rapporteurs. I and my co-rapporteur, Inigo Mendez de Vigo MEP, with the assistance of José Luis Pacheco of the committee staff, had drafted this in French, as the easiest common language among the three of us, and I was slightly apprehensive about how it would be turned into English - would it sound odd, would there be political hostages to fortune, how would the style seem?

Reading words that stand in your own name, but you have not written in English, so not chosen the exact words, was bound to be hazardous for a potentially controversial political text.

As it turns out, the translators have done a wonderful job, sometimes even seeming to improve on the original, and certainly aware of many of the nuances. The only times I wince are the passages where the style is a bit too flowery for English - because that's the way we wrote them in French, in which just such a style can be normal. There are just a few passages where I would have chosen a different vocabulary, not because it is wrong, but because I know how some people will twist the meanings of words in political debates. But out of more than seventy pages of text, these are mercifully few and far between. Congratulations to the translators!

The English language – a winner or a loser?

Over the weekend, I went to The Hague to speak at the conference of Europe’s young socialists (which includes Labour students and Young Labour). I was struck that the youngsters manage without interpretation – all, including the French, use English for all the debates and discussions. Not yet something we can look forward to in the European Parliament, but an interested indicator of the trend towards our language – or a simplified version of it – becoming the lingua franca of Europe.

This has both advantages and disadvantages. A commonly understood language helps communication and cuts interpretation costs. It gives an unfair advantage to native speakers (which some will see as an advantage, but others won't!). But it does mean that we all tend to speak a simplified form of English, devoid of idioms and of less well known expressions and turns of phrase. No references to "batting on a sticky wicket" or using rhyming slang!

The massive gains and convenience are at the expense of an impoverishment of the language.