ISSUES OF TERMINOLOGY
(THE FRAMEWORK OF CATEGORIES)
One of the most important features of the process of regulating space activities is its unique terminology, in most cases not previously used.
It is necessary to understand that the formation of terminology in Outer Space Law basically occurred under diplomatic or political influence and often lacked a scientific legal basis. At the same time, the official languages that are applied to present terms and texts on the regulation of space activities (for example, UN Resolutions) are mainly English, Russian, French, Spanish, Arabic, and Chinese.
In turn, even when translating the same texts and terms into different official languages, significant inconsistencies appeared in the correct definition of the object of translation and its interpretation. Provided the text is translated into other languages that are not official UN languages, such inconsistencies may be even more considerable.
The reason for this is that translations of the texts of legal acts were performed by each space State at its discretion (without coordination with other States), which often led to the use of different terms to describe the same action or subject. In some cases, this changed the meaning and true understanding of the essence of the text, which was laid down by its creators.
Nevertheless, not a single decision was made at the official level regarding the development of a classification of at least basic terms and their analogs in different languages that can be applied for translation and their correct interpretation.
Therefore, the problems of using terms and their interpretation emerged at the beginning of the formation of Outer Space Law, namely, directly when describing space beyond the Earth.
For a long time, most peoples described this space with the ancient Greek word “Cosmos” (in Ancient Greek κόσμος). However, this word literally means “order,” that is the ordered state of an object (this object in the ancient world was often perceived as the entire Universe). Nonetheless, the term has been used for thousands of years to refer to space beyond Earth.
Over time, to denote space outside the Earth the set expressions “Space” or “Outer Space” were established in English, and in French “Espace” or “L’Espace extra-atmosphérique”. At the same time, the ancient Greek term “Cosmos” continued to be used mainly in Slavic languages to identify space beyond the Earth.
Therefore, in international documents, the description of space beyond the Earth was somewhat different.
Thus, in the English versions of the Resolutions of the UN General Assembly, when describing space activities, the space outside the Earth is often defined with the words “outer space and celestial bodies” (UN Resolutions 1721). That is, in the English versions of the texts of the Resolutions, “celestial bodies” are not part of “outer space”. However, the formulation of “outer space and celestial bodies” does not include stars (such as the Sun), various particles, and “invisible” waves (such as electromagnetic waves), – the author expects lawyers to remember the “particle-wave theory”. In this regard, it remains unclear whether stars belong to “celestial bodies” or not, and also whether the light they emit belongs to “outer space” or not.
Also, since the term “Space law” (or “Outer Space law”) does not contain the phrase “celestial bodies” (“celestial bodies” is not part of “Outer Space” that is evident from international documents), it remains incomprehensible whether “Outer Space Law” extends to the process of legal regulation of activities on celestial bodies or not (or for correctness it should be called “Law of outer space and celestial bodies”).
At the same time, this example shows only those problems that need to be resolved within the English texts of documents.
In turn, with the literal translation of English texts into other languages (and the translation shall be literal since we are talking about scientific terms) the dissonance becomes even more significant.
As for a literal translation of the word “Space” into Slavic languages one will not get a description of “Space” outside the Earth but a description of the ordinary “expanse”.
In this regard, in international legal acts regulating space activities, drawn up in Slavic languages (for example, in Russian), an indication that an object belongs to “outer space and celestial bodies” is performed through the use of the word “Cosmos”. For example, in Slavic languages, descriptions of space beyond the Earth are usually carried out with words that can literally be translated into English as “Cosmos” or “Cosmic space”. Moreover, in contrast to the English interpretation of the term “space” (or “outer space”), in Slavic languages, the concept of “cosmos” (or “cosmic space”) most often includes “celestial bodies”.
Moreover, in Slavic languages, the phrase “celestial bodies” is very rarely used since when translated into Slavic languages it literally means “gods bodies” or “magnificent bodies” depending on the context. In turn, in Slavic languages, an expression is sometimes used to denote “celestial bodies”, which can literally be translated into English as “sky bodies”. However, since among the Slavic peoples the word “sky” literally means only what they see above, to indicate “celestial bodies” despite a general definition it is often used specific names: “planets”, “asteroids”, “stars”, “particles, and so on.
And there are a huge number of such differences in the definition and application of scientific terms of Outer Space Law.
Only based on the above examples one can notice a fundamental difference in the description of specific objects of space activity and different understandings of the same words in the languages of the Romano-Germanic group and the Slavic group. The same difference in the perception of words exists in Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, and other languages.
In this regard, we can state the fact that the process of developing international acts of Outer Space Law in different languages or translating them from one official language to another has not implied a legal scientific basis but is of an artistic and publicistic (diplomatic or political) nature. That is, the translations of such documents and their terminology were not performed literally, accurately, and scientifically. This is mainly because the presentation of the texts of such documents was carried out by a translator who had no experience in philological research in the field of space activities (or who had nothing to do with space activities at all).
This situation has often led to unnecessary discussions, incorrect research, and misunderstanding in the international community, that is, to confusion and ineffectiveness of Outer Space Law.
For example, the English version of the UN General Assembly Resolution 1802 (paragraph 3) describes liability for damage caused by the operation of an object called a “space vehicle”. At the same time, a literal translation of the term “space vehicle” into any Slavic language would indicate “means of transportation in expanse” – that is, a vehicle that is used to transport of what is contained therein (in other words, a general description of a passive object not related to “Cosmos” is provided).
In turn, in the Russian version of this Resolution, only one phrase is used for the same object, which can be literally translated into English as “cosmic ship” – that is, a controlled military object that its commanding officer uses to get to a specific point “Cosmos” (an active object directly related to “Cosmos”). At the same time, in the Slavic versions of the UN Resolutions, the terms “space vehicle” and “spacecraft” were never used at all.
From here it becomes clear why citizens of the States of the Eastern Coalition in the second half of the 20th century perceived all activities in space of the States of the Western Coalition as military activity (even where there was none.).
In this connection, the author considers it to be very important to develop terminology for this area of law and approve the name of each term in all existing languages of the world.
For example, in his earlier studies, the author proposed using the term “Cosmos” to refer to all space outside the Earth’s atmosphere and everything that is in it.
Perhaps, to create a reference name for each term, it is necessary to develop a separate cosmic language or use universal languages similar to Latin, Ancient Greek, or Esperanto.
Either way, immediate decisions need to be made on this matter.