THE 4 TH FACULTY OF ENGLISH FOR INTERPRETATION AND TRANSLATION ACADEMIC CONFERENCE AND AWARDS CEREMONY 1. Subject: The Influence of Language on Cognition * Presenter: Kim Yohan. Kwon Minkyu, Shin Sunkyung. Shim Yirang Woo Rina Major: TESOL and English Linguistics Advisor: Dr. KIM, Jihyun 2. Subject: Subtitling Lincoln: focusing on historical and political background Presenter: Lee Kyerang, Kong Heeweon, Han Sanghwa Major: English-Korean Interpretation and Translation Studies Advisor: Dr. SUNG, Seung-eun 3. Subject: Christian Cultural Heritage appearing as American legal issues Presenter: Lee Youngjo Major: English Literature and Translation Advisor: Dr. PARK, Jungman 4. Subject: The Impact of Brexit on the Relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union Presenter: Kim Bosung Major: Interpretation and Translation for International Trade and Relations in English-Speaking Areas Advisor: Dr. KIM, Sangsoo 5. Subject: African American Soul and Korean Han ( 恨 ) as reflected in The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison and Seopyeonje( 西 便 制 ) by Lee Cheong-Jun Presenter: Moon Narae Major: English Literature and Translation Advisor: Dr. PARK, Jungman

The Influence of Language on Cognition * Kim, Yo-han Kwon, Min-kyu Shin, Sun-kyung Shim, Yi-rang Woo, Ri-na TESOL and English Linguistics Content I. Introduction II. III. IV. Theoretical Background Research Method Results V. Conclusion * This work was based on an earlier study by Kwon, Su-jin, Lee, Hyeon-jeong, Kim, Yo-han

I. Introduction When it comes to the relation between language and thought, the question most often asked is: which influences the other? Although a lot of research on this question has been done, there is still no clear answer. In this study, we conducted a series of experiments investigating the hypothesis: Language influences cognition. We compared three languages: Korean, English, and French. We found that Korean speakers are better at calculating than their Western counterparts. We suggest that this is because the numerical system of the Korean language is more transparent, and this transparency between form and meaning of the language makes the calculating faster than English and French. We put English as median value to prove that the complicity of the language and the time taken in calculating are directly proportional to each other. Language is not just a means of communication. To some degree, our culture and even our thought processes are influenced by language (Mills, 2000). Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767-1835) is a scholar from the nineteenth century who was the first to claim language completely determines thought, which is impossible without language. Two related but slightly different lines of thought building on Humboldt s claims have been done investigated, and we have used them as a base in this study. One is called Linguistic Determinism. Linguistic determinism is the idea that language and its structures limit and determine human knowledge or thought, as well as thought processes such as categorization, memory, and perception (Hickmann, 2000). The other is called Linguistic Relativity. Linguistic relativity, popularly known as the Sapir Whorf hypothesis, is a weaker form of linguistic determinism which argues that individuals experience the world based on the structure of the language they habitually use. For example, studies have shown that people find it easier to recognize and remember shades of colors for which they have a specific name (D'Andrade, 1995).

II. Theoretical Background 1. Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis was first proposed by Edward Sapir, and his student Benjamin Lee. Since then, it has been developed by many scholars. There are two versions of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis: Strong version: The language we speak determines the way we think. Weak version: The language we speak influences the way we think. (Kovecses, 2006) Whorf suggested a well-known example to support this hypothesis: the Inuit can think more intelligently about snow because their language has more sophisticated words for snow, for example: falling snow, slushy snow, hard-packed snow, snow on the ground and so on while English has only one word, snow. 2. Linguistic Determinism Linguistic Determinism is a more extreme version of linguistic relativity; the structure of a language can strongly influence or determine someone s world view, which provides a theoretical framework for generating, sustaining and applying knowledge (Kay and Kempton, 1984). 3. Linguistic Relativity Linguistic relativity is a hypothesis about the relationship between the language we speak and the way we think and act, claiming that language has special effects on mental activity. In other words, speakers of different languages have different structures of perception (Oh, 1998).

III. Research Method The participants in our study were three Koreans, three American English speakers and three French speakers. There were three variables: age, sex and occupation. Their average age was 40 years old and they were all professors. We conducted three types of tests, using the same questions and measuring the time it took to complete each test. We conducted two types of tests to check their mathematical thinking process. Firstly, we tested differences in the participants ability to analyze patterns using the numerical system of their native language. Each subject was given a paper which contained patterns of numbers in Korean, English, or French. Then they filled in the correct numbers in the blanks on the paper (Figure 1, Figure 2, and Figure 3). Secondly, we tested their processing speed through arithmetic problems. Problems consisted of addition and subtraction with combinations of single digit and double digit number (Figure 4). Lastly, we used arithmetic questions again on third test (Figure 5). We did not show visual materials, but read aloud the numbers in each problem to each subject. And then the subject memorized it and answered the questions on the paper. We examined their arithmetic processing speed by listening to the numbers and checking accuracy and response times. (Figure 1)

(Figure 2) (Figure 3)

(Figure 4) (Figure 5) IV. Results According to the experiment, we have found the results as the tables below. Different cognitive representation of number can be affected by numerical language characteristics differentiating French, English, and Korean. The more complicated numerical system of the language they have, the longer it takes to calculate the arithmetic problems. French language which has the most complicated numerical system among the three languages took the longest time calculating, and Korean language which has the most transparent system took the least time. As can be seen in Table 4, the averages of the time taken for each method, Korean subjects were nearly two times faster than their French counterparts in all methods. English language is in between those two. (Table 1) (Method1: filling in blanks, Method2: written arithmetic test, Method3: mental arithmetic test)

(Table 2) (Method1: filling in blanks, Method2: written arithmetic test, Method3: mental arithmetic test) (Table 3) (Method1: filling in blanks, Method2: written arithmetic test, Method3: mental arithmetic test) (The averages of the time taken for each method) (Table 4) As you see the results of method 3, the numbers were relatively high. We suggest that this is because the test requiring more use of a language is affected more by the complicity of the language.

V. Conclusion As we have shown above, the numerical terms employed in different languages may affect the speed of perceiving numbers and performing calculation. Participants whose native language was Korean, which has a relatively regular and transparent number term system, were remarkably faster than the French participants at numerical thought, whose language is quite irregular in its number system. These results show that the more regular or transparent number system a language has, the faster mathematical thinking is likely to be possible. Also, this study indicates that we do understand and conceptualize our numerical system through the language we use. We provided strong evidence that language and thought have a very close relationship. The results of our study do not, however, mean that language itself can limit and determine the whole way of our thinking, as the strong version of linguistic determinism contends. Instead, what we can claim is that language does influence our thought significantly. We acknowledge the possibility that there could be other variables in the experiments such as the individual's calculating ability and different education systems of countries that could have affected the results. However, it is noticeable that the French participants of our research were consciously aware of the source of the difficulties they had during the experiments, that is, the irregular number system of French. And it reveals that languages somehow greatly affect thought enough to be sometimes recognized by their speakers consciously. So, tasks for further research should include efforts to discover the magical force of a language on thought in more detail through various experimental studies, minimizing cultural intervention as much as possible.

References D'Andrade, Roy (1995). The development of cognitive anthropology. NY: Cambridge University Press Hickmann, Maya (2000). Linguistic relativity and linguistic determinism: some new directions. Linguistics, 38 (2), 410. Kay, Paul & Kempton, Willett (1984). What is the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis? American Anthropologist, 86 (1), 64-79 Kovecses, Zoltan (2006). Language, Mind, and Culture: A Practical Introduction. Oxford University Press, USA Mills, Jon (2000). Linguistic Relativity and Linguistic Determinism: Idiom in 20th Century Cornish. Presented in the New Directions in Celtic Studies Conference, Newquay Oh, Myung-gi (1998). 언어 상대성과 언어간 번역 가능성에 관핚 연구. 三 陟 大 學 校

Subtitling Lincoln: focusing on historical and political background Lee Kyerang, Kong Heeweon, Han Sanghwa English-Korean Interpretation and Translation Studies 1. Introduction Many of you may have experienced complicated feelings after watching a movie: the movie you cannot even understand the cause-and-effect of major conflicts. This can lead you to the world of being lost. 'Why do you think it happens? One reason can be the boring story itself, or it might have required you too many background knowledge. Also, it could be a problem of rough subtitles in some aspects. If these happen at the same time, the movie cannot communicate with viewers anymore. Several weeks ago, the researchers had a chance to watch a movie called Lincoln(2012) directed by Steven Spielberg. This film brought us to the same question. It was obviously telling us meaningful messages, but we couldn't understand them at once. We started thinking why we had a thin time in comprehension, and how it could be overcome. After thorough considerations, putting aside the heavy storyline, we realized that translation could save us from the complexion. At this point, we set our goal for this research to polish translation as a "true communication mediator." In this context, we chose three episodes from the movie which we considered as the causes of disturbances for viewers. Firstly, when Lincoln telling a story about a woman he defended, lacked clear linking with his following argument. In the second, too much historical and political information was packed in a short monologue which might be unfamiliar to the general Korean audiences. The last episode didn t explicit enough information of the historical figures which contain significant meanings in the small storytelling. Research method was developed in three phases. First, we modified subtitles which we thought required revision for the audience to better understand the movie. Then we conducted a survey on the preference of two different subtitles; the one with original DVD version, and the other with the modified ones. Lastly, the survey results were analyzed A major challenge with subtitling of Lincoln is the time and space constraints. When it comes to an audio-visual translation, 'Explicitation' which would often be employed to provide

background information for the target audience unfamiliar with the source culture, cannot be a master-key. Particularly in the movie Lincoln, large amount of historical and political background knowledge are required to fully understand the conflicts and overall plot. To overcome the challenges and truly mediate the messages at the same time, translation strategies and further survey method used will be described in details on the followings. 2. Subtitling: Constraints and Strategies Subtitling may be defined as a translation practice that consists of presenting a written text, generally on the lower part of the screen, that endeavours to recount the original dialogue of the speakers, as well as the discursive elements that appear in the image, and the information that is contained on the soundtrack. All subtitled programmes are made up of three main components: the spoken word, the image and the subtitles. The interaction of these three components, along with the viewer s ability to read both the images and the written text at a particular speed, and the actual size of the screen, determine the basic characteristics of the audiovisual medium. Subtitles must appear in synchrony with the image and dialogue, provide a semantically adequate account of the SL dialogue, and remain displayed on scree lon enough for the viewers to be able to read them. 1 In audio-visual translating, there are some difficulties to explicitate all the information that is required to understand the movie. As subtitles can occupy only a limited part of the screen 2, subtitles should be written within 2 lines and each line should stay within 15 letters. 3 As there are cultural differences, a translator should try to mitigate the gap between cultures. There are several strategies that can help to reduce cultural differences. The main strategies that would be covered are specification and reduction. Specification is to explain the idea specifically when there is no corresponding word. Reduction is to not translate some parts, if the parts were not necessary for understanding the movie. 4 1 Jorge Diaz Cintas and Aline Remael(2007), Audiovisual Translation Subtitling 2 Elisa Perego(2003), Evidence of Explicitation in Subtitling: Towards a Categorisation 3 장민호(2008), 번역과 자막 4 박윤철(2006), 영상자막번역과 두 줄의 미학

ST: That s what Ethan Allen called to the commander of Fort Ticonderoga in 1178. Lincoln was famous for telling stories from the past to people. Therefore, there are many stories that has historical backgrounds. This scene could be a good example that requires historical backgrounds. Even though Lincoln told the story of Ethan Allen to encourage soldiers to be more energetic, most Korean audiences are less likely to know who Allen is. Because of this, viewers were not able to understand why this story cheers soldiers up. ST: Say it s after the war, and I can no longer use my war powers to just ignore the court s decisions, like I sometimes felt I had to do. In this part, Lincoln tried to explain why he struggled for liberty of the slavery before the war ended. However, as audiences do not know the scope of war power or the relationship between courts and administrative branch, viewers are less likely to understand what would happen when the war ends. 3. Research Method This study is designed into three steps. First, three scenes from the movie Lincoln with which we had difficulty understanding the subtitle were selected. After that original subtitle from the three scenes were revised into new ones with the purpose of making it more clear and understandable. The researchers went through following process. Some parts that originally had excessive information and required the audience too much background knowledge to grasp the meaning were either backed up with extra information or removed from the subtitle, if needed. In the movie Lincoln, there were a lot of historical, and some geological information that needed to be explained or omitted to make them more comprehensible. For the parts that involved humor in it, the goal was to try not to omit too much information and try to supplement with extra information because every line was cohesively connected to each other, contributing to making the whole scene hilarious. Other parts that just didn't seem natural were rewritten with more natural expressions found. Revised subtitle was corrected to be maximum fifteen Korean letters per line for each scene which is 3-5 seconds long. Next step was to find out whether the revision has actually made the comprehension easier. Therefore, we conducted a survey as we played same clips twice with different subtitles to the survey participants. Since they could have some clues from the first trial, we divided them into two groups and switched the order for the rest to prevent the biased results.

After that, questions comparing the original and the revised version of subtitle were asked to students majoring in English translation and interpretation at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies. At this point, researchers decided to do a separate survey for scenes for different strategies were applied for each scene. Also, since scene two was preceded by scene one, those two scenes were merged when the survey was conducted. As a result two surveys were conducted for each part, for part 1 which is a combination of scene 1 and 2, and for part 2 which is scene 3. The questionnaire consists of three questions asking which version the students prefer in terms of understanding and why they prefer one version than the other. Questions were a multiple choice, but we also allowed the respondents to give free opinion. As the last step, the researchers analyzed the answers from the students to find out what factors made the understanding of the subject easier or harder and whether they were from the original subtitle or the revised version. Questionnaire form spreaded out for the survey was attached below both in English and Korean versions. < Questionnaire _ English ver. > 1. Which version among these two is more understandable for you? 1 version A 2 version B 2. What made the subtitle more understandable than the other one? Choose one answer. 1 enough specification on background information 2 appropriate length of the subtitle that made it easier to read and understand 3 etc. ( ) 3. What interrupted you from understanding the other subtitle? Choose one answer. 1 Too much background information that is not specified 2 Too much content that made it difficult to read through and understand within short period of time. 3 etc. ( )

< 설문지 _ 한국어 > 1. 어떤 버전이 더 이해하기 쉬웠나요? 1 A 2 B 2. 더 이해하기 쉬웠던 가장 큰 이유는 무엇이었나요? 1 자막에서 배경지식에 대한 설명이 충분히 되었다. 2 자막의 길이가 적당해서 읽고 이해하는데 어려움이 없었다. 3 기타: 3. 이해가 어려웠던 다면, 가장 큰 이유는 무엇이었다고 생각하나요? 1 모르는 정보가 많아 내용 자체를 이해할 수 없었다. 2 자막에 너무 많은 정보가 들어있어 짧은 시간에 읽고 이해하기 어려웠다. 3 기타: 4. Revised Version. <Episode1> ST TT1 (DVD version) TT2 (Edited version) I don't recall Edward Bates being any too certain about the legality of my proclamation. Just it wasn't downright criminal. 에드워드 베이츠는 노예해방선언의 적법성에 대한 확신이 없었소 그저 범죄는 아니라고 믿었을 뿐이죠 에드워드 베이츠는 노예해방선언의 적법성에 확신이 없었소. 그저 범죄라고 단정지을 수 없었을 뿐이죠. Somewhere in between. 그 중간이라고 생각했어요 애매하다고 생각했을 거요. Back when I rode the legal circuit in Illinois, I defended a woman from Metamora named Melissa 일리노이 주 순회 재판소에서 일할 때 메타모라에 사는 여인을 변호한 적이 있소 일리노이에서 변호사였을 때, 의뢰인 중에 멜리사 고잉스라는

Goings. Seventy-seven years old. They said she'd murdered her husband. He was 83. He was choking her and she grabbed a hold of a stick of firewood and fractured his skull and he died. In his will, he wrote, I expect she has killed me If I get over it, I will have revenge No one was keen to see her convicted, he was that kind of husband. I asked the prosecuting attorney if I might have a short conference with my client. She and I went into a room in the courthouse, but I alone emerged. The window in the room was found to be wide open. It was believed the old lady may have climbed out of it. I told the bailiff, right before I left her in the room. She asked 이름은 멜리사 고잉스 77 세였소 83 살인 남편을 살해한 혐의였어요 남편이 목을 졸라서 장작을 집어 들고 두개골을 박살내 죽였죠 남편은 유언장에 쓰길 '마누라가 날 죽일 것 같다' '만약 살아남는다면 복수할 것이다' 부인이 벌 받길 바란 사람은 없었죠 그런 남편이었으니까요 전 검사에게 의뢰인과 단둘이 얘길 좀 해도 되냐고 물었소 우린 법원의 한 사무실로 들어갔는데 나올 땐 나 혼자였소 창문이 활짝 열려 있던 걸로 봐서 부인이 아마도 거길 통해 도망친 것 같소 내가 집행관에게 말했지 방을 나오기 전에 부인이 어디 사람이 있었소. 메타모라 출신에 77 세였지. 83 세 남편을 죽였다더군. 남편이 먼저 부인의 목을 졸라서 부인은 장작을 집어 내리쳐서 두개골을 박살내 죽였어요. 남편은 거의 죽어갈 때쯤 유언장에 힘겹게 쓰길. "아내 손에 죽어가고 있다." "살아 남으면 복수를 하겠어." 아무도 부인이 죄를 지었다고 생각하지 않았죠. 남편이 그런 사람이었으니까요. 난 검사에게 의뢰인과의 면담을 요청했소. 법원의 한 사무실로 함께 들어갔다 나올 때는 나 혼자였지. 방 안 창문은 활짝 열려있었어요. 사람들은 부인이 창문을 타고 탈출했다고 생각했소. 집행관에게는 살짝 귀띔해줬어요.

me where could get a good drink of water, and I told her, Tennesse. Mrs. Goings was seen no more in Metamora. Enough justice had been done.they even forgavethe bondsman her bail 물맛이 좋냐 묻기에 테네시라고 했다고 말이오 부인은 그렇게 메타모라에서 사라졌죠 그 정도면 정의는실현된 겁니다. 부인의 보석금까지 보증인에게 돌려줬어요 방을 나서기 전,부인이 맛있는 물을 마실 수 있는 곳을 묻길래 테네시강이라고 대답했다고. 이후, 메타모라에서 다시는 부인을 볼 수 없었지. 결국 법원은 부인의 보석금까지 돌려줬소[성 3]. 난 이 것이 바로 정의라고 생각했소. <Episode2> ST TT1 (DVD version) TT2 (Edited version) I decided that the Constitution gives me war powers, but no one knows just exactly what those powers are. Some say they don t exist. I don t know. I decided I needed them to exist to uphold my oath to protect the Constitution, which I decided meant that I could take the rebels slaves from em as property confiscated in war. That might recommend to suspicion that I agree with the rebs that their slaves are property in the first place. 난 생각했소. 헌법은 나에게 전시 지휘권을 제공하지만 그게 어떤 힘인지 아무도 모르오 그런 건 없다고도 하지. 글쎄요 난 헌법수호의 맹세를 지키기 위해 전시지휘권이 존재한다고 결정했소. 여기서 헌법을 수호한다는 건 남부군의 노예를 전리품으로 몰수한다는 걸 뜻하죠. 그렇다면 내가 노예를 남부인의 재산으로 보는 게 아닌가 하는 의심이 생기는데 그건 헌법으로 나는 전시권한이라는 힘을 가지게 됐소. 하지만 그 누구도 그 힘으로 할 수 있는 게 뭔지는 정확히 모르오. 어떤 이들은 그 힘을 인정하지 않기도 하지. 사실 나도 잘 모르겠어요 나는 헌법을 수호하겠다는 맹세를 지키기 위해 그 권력이 필요하다고 생각했소. 그래서 종전 후에 반역세력의 재산인 노예를 몰수하기로 했소. 그렇게 되면 사람들은 내가 노예를 재산으로 보는

아닙니다. 남부인들에게 동의한 게 아닌가 하고 의심을 하는데 절대 그런 의미가 아니오. Of course I don t, never have, 결코 그런 적이 없죠. 절대 그런 뜻이 아니에요. I m glad to see any man free, and if calling a man property, or war contraband, does the trick... Why I caught at the opportunity. Now here s where it gets truly slippery. I use the law allowing for the seizure of property in a war knowing it applies only to the property of governments and citizens of belligerent nations. But the South ain t a nation, that s why I can t negotiate with em. So if in fact the Negroes are property according to law, have I the right to take the rebels property from em, if I insist they re rebels only, and not citizens of a belligerent country? And slipperier still: I maintain it ain t our actual Southern states in rebellion, but only the rebels living in those states, the laws of which states remain in force. 난 자유로운 인간을 옹호하기에 사람을 재산이나 전리품이라는 말로 표현하는 한이 있더라도 목표를 이루고 싶을 뿐이오 정말 까다로운 건 다음 부분인데 난 법으로 전리품을 포획하는걸 허용하지만 전리품은 교전국의 정부나 시민의 재산만을 뜻하오. 그런데 남부는 국가가 아니죠. 그래서 그들과 협상할 수 없어요. 그런데 남부를 교전중인 국가가 아닌 반란집단으로 보면서 그들의 재산인 흑인을 전리품으로 취득할 권리가 과연 우리에게 있을까? 더 억지스럽지만 반란세력을 남부의 주가 아닌 그 주에 사는 사람들로 본다면 남부주의 법은 효력을 유지하게 됩니다. 나는 인간은 자유로워야 한다는 데에 전적으로 지지하며 비록, 인간을 재산이라고 칭하는 한이 있더라도, 이번을 기회로 내 목표를 이루고 싶을 뿐이란 말이오 자, 정말 애매한 부분은 여기부터예요 나는 법으로 교전국의 전리품을 몰수하기로 했소 하지만 전리품은 교전국 정부나 시민의 재산을 의미합니다 그런데 남부는 국가가 아닙니다 그래서 그들과 협상할 수 가 없는 겁니다. 흑인을 재산으로 취급한다고 해도, 과연 남부가 국가가 아닌 반란집단일 뿐이라면/ 그들의 재산을 몰수할 수 있을까요? 더욱 애매한 부분은 말입니다, 만약 반란 세력을 남부의 주가 아니라

The laws of which states remain in force. That means, that since it s states laws that determine whether Negroes can be sold as slaves, as property 남부주의 법은 효력을 유지한다 그 말은 흑인이 재산이냐에 대한 여부를 주의 법이 결정한다는 의미죠. 그 주에 사는 사람들이라고 보면, 남부 주는 반란세력이 아니기 때문에 주의 법은 효력을 유지하게 됩니다 주의 법이 효력을 유지한다 즉, 흑인이 재산으로서 노예거래가 되는 지 안 되는 지를 각 주에서 결정한다는 것 입니다 - the Federal government doesn t have a say in that, least not yet - then Negroes in those states are slaves, hence property, hence my war powers allow me to confiscate em as such. So I confiscated em. But if I m a respecter of states laws, how then can I legally free em with my Proclamation, as I done, unless I m cancelling states laws? I felt the war demanded it; my oath demanded it; I felt right with myself; and I hoped it was legal to do it, I m hoping still. 연방법은 그에 대해 영향력이 없고요. 아직까지는요. 그럼 그들 주에서 흑인은 노예이자 재산이니 내 전시지휘권에 따라 전리품으로 취할 수 있고 난 그렇게 할거요. 그런데 내가 주법을 존중할 경우 노예해방선언으로 어떻게 그들을 법적 해방 시킬 수 있겠소? 주의 법을 무효로 한다면 모를까 전쟁 때문에 무효화가 불가피하오. 내 맹세 때문이오. 난 그게 옳다 느꼈고 법에 부합하길 바랐소 지금도 그렇고요. 연방 정부는 그에 대해 왈가왈부 할 수 없어요 아직까지는 말입니다 그러므로 남부 주에 있는 흑인들은 여전히 노예이자 재산이죠 그래서 내가 전시권한으로 그들을 취할 수 있는 거죠 만약 내가 주법을 인정할 경우 노예해방선언으로 어떻게 노예를 합법적으로 해방시킬 수 있겠소? 주 법을 인정하는 한 노예 해방은 이뤄질 수가 없어요 노예 해방 때문에 전쟁을 한 거라고 생각하오 내 맹세 때문에도 그렇고 난 그게 정의롭다고 느꼈고 법으로도 부합하길

Two years ago I proclaimed these people emancipated then, thence forward and forever free. But let s say the courts decide I had no authority to do it. They might well decide that. Say there s no amendment abolishing slavery. Say it s after the war, and I can no longer use my war powers to just ignore the courts decisions, like I sometimes felt I had to do. Might those people I freed be ordered back into slavery? That s why I d like to get the Thirteenth Amendment through the House, and on its way to ratification by the states, wrap the whole slavery thing up, forever and aye. As soon as I m able. 2 년전 난 흑인해방을 선언했소. 그때와 그때부터 영원히 자유로우리라 내게 그럴 권한이 없다고 법원이 결정했다 칩시다. 그럴 수 있죠 노예제 폐지 수정안이 없다면 종전 후 법원의 결정을 무시할 전시지휘권이 나에게 더 이상 없다면 가끔 무시해야 할 때가 있기 때문이오. 내가 해방시킨 흑인들을 다시 노예로 복귀시켜야 하오? 그래서 난 13 차 수정안을 하원에서 통과시켜 연방의 비준을 받게 하려는 거요. 내게 능력이 있을 때 노예제도를 끝내려고요. 바랐소 지금도 그렇고요 2 년 전, 나는 흑인 해방을 선언했소. 이제 앞으로 영원히 자유로우리라 하지만 법원에서 노예해방선언이 법에 어긋난다고 판결했다 칩시다 아마 법원은 그렇게 할 것이오 노예제 폐지수정안은 유효하지 않다면서 말입니다 만약 전쟁이 끝난 후 전시지휘권이 없어져 노예해방선언도 무효화된다면 내가 해방시켰던 노예들은 다시 노예의 신분으로 돌아와야만 하오 그래서 13 차 수정안을 연방의 비준을 받게 하려는 거요 앞으로 영원히 노예제 문제를 해결하기 위해서 말이오 내게 그럴 권한이 있을 때 말입니다 Now. End of this month. 지금 말입니다! 이 달 말에요. 지금이요 이 달 말에 말입니다 And I d like you to stand behind me. Like my cabinet s most always done. 그러니 날 지지해주시오. 대부분의 경우 날 도와주지 않았소 그러니 날 지지해 주시오 내각이 항상 그래왔듯 말이오

<Episode3> ST TT1 (DVD version) TT2 (Edited version) Come on out, you old rat! That s what Ethan Allen called tothecommander of Fort Ticonderogain 1776. Come on out, you old rat! Course there were only forty-odd redcoats at Ticonderoga. But,but there is one Ethan Allen story that I m very partial to It was right after the Revolution, right after peace had been concluded, and Ethan Allen went to London to help our new country conduct its business with the king. The English sneered at how rough we are, and rude and simpleminded and on like that, everywhere he went, till one day he was invited to the town house of a great English lord. Dinner was served, beverages imbibed, time passed, as happens, and Mr. Allen found he needed the privy. He was grateful to be directed thence - 나와라, 늙은 쥐야! 이선앨런이 그렇게 소리쳤지 1776 년 포트 타이콘데로가 사령관에게 말이오 나와라, 늙은 쥐야! 물론 그곳엔 영국 군인이 40 명 남짓밖에 없었소 내가 아주 좋아하는 이선 앨런 이야기가 있어요 독립혁명 직후였소 평화조약이 체결된 직후였죠 이선 앨런은 우리의 새 나라와 영국 왕의 관계 증진을 위해 영국에 갔는데 영국인들이 우리를 아주 미개하고 무례하며 아둔한 사람으로 취급하더랍니다 어딜가도요 그러던 어느 날 한 영국 귀족의 집으로 초대를 받았대요 저녁도 먹고 술도 한잔 하고 그러다 보니 좀 마렵더랍니다 화장실로 안내해 주더래요 물을 비웠죠 나와라, 늙은 쥐야! 독립 운동가 이선 앨런이 그렇게 소리쳤지 요새를 점령한 영국 사령관에게 말이오 나와라, 늙은 쥐야! 물론 그곳엔 고작 40 명 가량의 영국 군인이 있었소 내가 아주 좋아하는 이선 앨런 이야기가 있어요 독립혁명 직후였소 평화를 되찾은 직후였고 이선 앨런은 우리의 새 나라와 영국 왕의 관계 증진을 위해 영국에 갔는데 영국인들이 우리를 아주 미개하고 무례하며 아둔한 사람으로 취급하더랍니다 어딜가도요 그러던 어느 날 한 영국 귀족의 집으로 초대를 받았대요 저녁도 먹고 술도 한잔 하고 그러다 보니 볼일을 보고 싶더랍니다 바로 안내 해주기에

relieved you might say. Now, Mr. Allen discovered on entering the water closet that the only decoration therein was a portrait of George Washington. Ethan Allen done what he came to do and returned to the drawing room. His host and the others were disappointed when he didn t mention Washington s portrait. And finally His Lordship couldn t resist, and asked Mr. Allen had he noticed it,the picture of Washington. He had. Well, what did he think of its placement, did it seem appropriately located to Mr. Allen? Mr. Allen said it did. His host was astounded! Appropriate? George Washington s likeness in a water closet? Yes, said Mr. Allen, Where it ll do good service: the whole world knows nothing ll make an Englishman shit quicker than the sight of George Washington. 그러고 나서 화장실 입구를 쳐다봤는데 장식이 딱 하나더래요 바로 조지워싱턴의초상화였죠 볼일을 마친 이선 앨런은 응접실로 돌아갔는데/ 집주인과 다른 손님들은 실망했죠 워싱턴 초상화 얘기를 안 꺼내니까요 결국 참다못한 집주인은 초상화를 봤냐고 묻더래요 봤다고 했죠 장소가 어떠냐고 묻더래요 그만하면 적당한 장소 같냐고 말입니다 앨런은 그렇다고 했죠 집주인은 놀라며 적당하다고요? 조지 워싱턴 초상화가 화장실에 있는 것이? 네, 상당히 쓸모 있을 겁니다 영국인들이 빨리 오줌 지리게 만드는 데 워싱턴만한 사람이 없다는 걸 다 아니까요 기뻐했죠 안심했다고 할까요? 화장실에 들어가 보니 장식이 딱 하나더래요 독립을 이끈 초대 대통령 조지 워싱턴의 초상화였죠 볼일을 마친 이선 앨런은 응접실로 돌아갔는데/ 집주인과 다른 손님들은 실망했죠 워싱턴 초상화 얘기를 안 꺼내니까요 참다못한 집주인은 초상화를 봤냐고 묻더래요 봤다고 했죠 그리고는 장소는 적당한 것 같은지 물었답니다 앨런은 그렇다고 했죠 집주인은 놀랐죠 적당하다고요? 조지 워싱턴 초상화가 화장실에 있는 것이? 네, 상당히 쓸모 있을 겁니다 영국인들을 어린아이마냥 오줌 지리게 만드는 데 워싱턴만한 사람이 없을테니까요 [성 5]

5. Survey Results 5.1. Revision Strategies Described < Episode 1 > In the first episode, Lincoln tells a story about a woman he defended. This segment lacked clear connection with his following argument. In addition, some phrases were inserted which could prevent audiences from understanding. To reduce the disturbances, reduction was mainly used, and general subtitles were mostly reworded for the seamless flow throughout the episode. For example, the words in Text A was the only connector between the two preceding the following episodes. However, it was not sufficiently explicated by translation, so the translation was revised in more comprehensible manner. Furthermore, in the text B, "bondsman" was not reflected in the translation to be effectively seen on the screen. (Text A) Original Text Original Subtitle Revised Version Enough justice had been done. 그 정도면 정의는 실현된 겁니다. 난 이 것이 바로 정의라고 생각했소. (Text B) Original Text Original Subtitle Revised Version They even forgave the bondsman her bail 부인의 보석금까지 보증인 에게 돌려줬어요 결국 법원은 부인의 보석금 까지 돌려줬소. <Episode 2> In the second episode, knowing political backgrounds of the United States is required to understand Lincoln s saying. For instance, in Text A, Lincoln tried to explain commanders why he struggled for liberty of the slavery before the war ends. However, there was too much information for Korean audiences to understand the meaning of Lincoln s saying. In the aspect of understanding the flow of the movie, explicit explanations to help audience to understand what Lincoln said were not essential. So, the information that was not necessary was eliminated. (Text A) Original Text Original Subtitle Reivsed Version

Say it s after the war, and I can no longer use my war powers to just ignore the courts decisions, like I sometimes felt I had to do. 종전 후 법원의 결정을 무시할 전시지휘권이 나에게 더 이상 없다면 가끔 무시해야 할 때가 있기 때문이오. 만약 전쟁이 끝난 후 전시지휘권이 없어져 노예해방선언도 무효화된다면 <Episode 3> Scene three was considered to be confused because it contained some historical information which includes an event like United States War of Independence and figures like George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. In the original DVD subtitle, those information was not specified in favor of readers' understanding. So researchers has revised it using techniques like Reduction, specification and adding. Examples are below. Original Text Original Subtitle Revised version That s what Ethan Allen called to the commander of Fort Ticonderoga in 1178 이선 앨런이 그렇게 소리쳤지/ 1776년 포트 타이콘데로가 사 형관에게 말이오/ 독립 운동가 이선 앨런이 그렇게 소리쳤지/ 요새를 점령한 영국 사령 관에게 말이오/ The original subtitle has two points that are quite confusing. First, details about Ethan Allen was not specified. Most Korean audience would not know who Ethan Allen is. Second, when you first read 1776년 포트 타이콘데로가 사령관 in Korean, readability is not good. For readers, it might be hard to figure out what the subtitle means in a short seconds. So, each part was revised to be "독립 운동가 이선 앨런이 그렇게 소리쳤지/ 요새를 점령한 영국 사령관에게 말이오". For the first part, specification was used to specify Ethan Allen's identity as a historical figure. For the second part, reduction was used for omitting the year and Ticonderoga to make the whole expression simpler.

Original Text Original Subtitle Revised Version the whole world knows nothing ll make an Englishman shit quicker than the sight of George Washington 영국인들이 빨리 오 줌 지리게 만드는데 / 워싱턴만한 사람이 없다는 걸 다 아니 까요/ 영국인들을 어린아이 마냥 오줌 지리게 만 드는데/ 워싱턴만한 사람이 없을 테니까요/ "the whole world knows nothing ll make an Englishman shit quicker than thesight of George Washington." was translated into "영국인들이 빨리 오줌 지리게 만드는 데/ 워싱턴만한 사 람이 없다는 걸 다 아니까요 in the original subtitle. There was nothing particularly wrong with this specific translation but researchers figured that Englishman's horror should be more emphasized to really give that effect of making fun of them. So, this part was revised to be " 영국인들을 어린아이마냥 오줌 지리게 만드는 데/ 워싱턴만한 사람이 없을 테니까요". As you can see Adding was used to highlight the Englishman's fear of Washington. Through the questionnaire survey for part 1(episode 1 and 2) and part 2(episode3) both on original and revised version, the responses we have collected were visualized below on the charts. [Chart 1]

[Chart 2] [chart 3]

[ Chart 4 ] [Chart 5] [Chart 6]

6. Discussion and Conclusion As the subtitles were revised strategically, researchers expected that the majority of respondents would agree that the revised version as easier and more comprehensible. However, there were no clear tendencies in the responses on preference. Still, the revised version was slightly more preferred. It was assumed that the number of respondents (which was about 40) were not sufficient to draw persuasive conclusion of this survey. Therefore, we re planning to conduct additional survey to enlarge the sample group. Based on the results so far, preferences on original and revised version were split into exact half and half. In terms of reasons, 90% and 80% regarded the length of subtitles were appropriate on the original and revised version respectively. Given that original version was relatively long, it is assumed that the preferences were mostly relied on respondents individual tastes. In other words, length of subtitles obviously was important but, half liked the revised version, and the other half liked longer ones. In addition, it is assumed that the word appropriate length used in the survey questionnaire was not clearly defined in the first hand. In part2, 40 percent of respondents have chosen the original subtitle and the other 60 percent have chosen the revised version. One of the most prominent reasons was that participants preferred the length of the original subtitle which does not include specification on each event or figure. A lot of respondents who chose etc. clarified that they prefer the exact translation of what the actor says to anyhow manipulated translation. This particular opinion probably came out because the respondents were students majoring in English Translation and Interpretation who can understand English without reading the subtitles. Moving on to reasons for choosing revised version, the most frequently chosen reason was that the revised version had enough specification on background information. Since Specification was a major revising strategy for this scene, we can assume that researchers expectation was fulfilled. Also, 36% of the respondents said that they chose the revised version because the length of the subtitle was appropriate. This is ironic because some respondents chose the original subtitle for the exact same reason. Therefore, we can conclude that the notion of appropriate length differs for each person as it is mentioned above. Again, as for the deficient samples collected, we will conduct additional survey for the further and detailed analysis on our research.

References 장민호(2008), 번역과 자막, 핚국문화사 박윤철(2006), 영상자막번역과 두 줄의 미학, 핚국문화사 Jorge Diaz Cintas and Aline Remael(2007), Audiovisual Translation Subtitling, Jerome Elisa perefo(2003), Evidence of Explicitation in Subtitling: Towards a Categorisation

Christian Cultural Heritage appearing as American legal issues Lee Youngjo English Literature and Translation Look at a dollar bill from the United States. You will find an expression printed on it, which says, In God we trust. What religion comes to your mind from the expression?psalm 56 in the King James Bible says, Be merciful unto me, O God: for man would swallow me up; he fighting daily oppresseth me. Mine enemies would daily swallow me up: for they be many that fight against me, O thou most High. What time I am afraid, I will trust in thee. In God I will praise his word, in God I have put my trust; I will not fear what flesh can

do unto me. Every day they wrest my words: all their thoughts are against me for evil. They gather themselves together, they hide themselves, they mark my steps, when they wait for my soul. Shall they escape by iniquity? in thine anger cast down the people, O God. Thou tellest my wanderings: put thou my tears into thy bottle: are they not in thy book? When I cry unto thee, then shall mine enemies turn back: this I know; for God is for me. In God will I praise his word: in the Lord will I praise his word. In God have I put my trust: I will not be afraid what man can do unto me. Thy vows are upon me, O God: I will render praises unto thee. For thou hast delivered my soul from death: wilt not thou deliver my feet from falling, that I may walk before God in the light of the living? These phrasesinspired me to examine how religion and state are not necessarily separated in the United States. I will introduce three cases to you today,which will show how Christian cultural heritage is entangled with American legal issues.the three cases are of blue laws, the Scopes trial, and the Ten Commandments case, Van Orden v. Perry. These cases prove that Christianity has been favored in the American legal system. The purpose of my presentation today is to have a chance to reconsider this phenomenon in the US society. Accordingly, I argue that it is time to draw a line between church and state in favor of religious diversity. First, blue laws, also known as Sunday laws, are definitely a Christian cultural heritage. They originated from Puritans who wanted to live by the Ten Commandments. Perhaps it is based on the fourth commandment in the King James Bible saying, Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Since the Sabbath day is Sunday to Christians, the blue laws are laws forbidding secular activities on the Sabbath such as the sale of alcoholic beverages or cars.

Some counties have much stricter blue laws banning the sale of furniture, shoes, clothing, home supplies and appliances on Sundays. Paramus, New Jersey, for example, is known for its own blue laws which are even stricter. They are banning any type of secular employment on Sundays except necessity items such as food and gasoline. Since 1610, various kinds of blue laws have been established to mandate church attendance and prohibit unseemly behaviors including drinking, recreational activities, and kissing on Sundays. Into the 20 th century, blue laws continued to be popular. In 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court even ruled that a Maryland law banning the sale of most goods was constitutional. However, there are many religions other than Christianity in the US and each of them has its own holy day. Considering that the Sabbath day is Saturday to Jews, and Friday to Muslims, blue laws are absolutely favoring most Christian sects. Moreover, it is unjustifiable for the government to restrict all citizens rights by enforcing a day of rest according to the doctrines of a specific religion. The second case is the Scopes trial. John Thomas Scopes, a school teacher in Tennessee, was accused of violating Tennessee s Butler Act. This law made it illegal to teach human evolution in any state-funded school. So, it went to court. This trial attracted public attention. Scopes was found guilty and fined $100(equivalent to $1,345 in 2015). The fallout of the trial was reflected in the high school biology texts published in the second half of the 1920s and the early 1930s. Textbook publishers paid close attention to the trial results and gauged what would be tolerated in public school biology textbooks and made adjustments accordingly. Of the most widely used textbooks after the trial, only one included the word evolution in its index; the relevant page included biblical quotations. It was not until the 1950 s that the theory of evolution started to make its way back into biology textbooks as a result from the space exploration programs. As you can see, a strong

fundamental Christian bias supported by the government has hindered the science education in America. The last case is the Ten Commandments case, Van Orden v.perry. Look at this Ten Commandments statue on the grounds of Texas State Capitol. Do you think it is against the separation of church and state or is it okay?a Texan attorney, Thomas Van Orden, filed a case against the Texas government, represented by the thengovernor Rick Perry, because he thought that the Ten Commandments monument standing on the grounds of Texas State Capitol was unconstitutional. So, the case was brought to the US Supreme Court in 2005. Mr. Van Orden said, "Religion thrives in this country, but government must stand neutral. A display such as we have in Texas of the Ten Commandments monument sends a message of religious favoritism rather than neutrality."also, The Hindu American Foundation gathered the support of nine co-signatories to file the brief representing the millions ofjains, Buddhists and Hindus in the USA.The brief says, The courts below [Federal Court of Appeals] completely ignored the effect of the

Ten Commandments Monument on non-judeo-christians, whose beliefs regarding the nature of God and the relationship between man and God differ greatly from those enshrined in the Monument and for whom the Monument is clearly and unavoidably sectarian. On the other side of the issue, groups of the Christian Right and the then Texas Solicitor General, Ted Cruz, argued with different defenses. They argued that the Biblical display could stay on public property. The groups of the Christian Right maintained that the monument represents not just an article of faith but a cornerstone of American life. Cruz contended that the statue may be religious but its setting and context are not. He said, "The Ten Commandments are indisputably a historical document that has an important secular impact on the development of Western legal codes and Western civilization, and under US law it is sensible to acknowledge that." Even the Bush administration filed a brief in support of the Texas government saying, "Religion has played a leading role in the history of the United States. Government may commemorate the Decalogue's influence on American legal and cultural history." Finally, the Supreme Court ruled on June 27, 2005, in favor of the Texas government, by a vote of 5 to 4 that the Ten Commandments monument was constitutional. However, in my opinion, this decision ignored religious diversity. Justice Scalia said that the people who are offended by the biblical display on the public property should turn their eyes away. He should face the reality that the power of America comes from cooperation among people with various kinds of religious beliefs or without one. The decision of intolerance can make the American citizens who are not religious feel that they are alienated from the American political culture because the display includes the phrase, I AM the LORD thy God and goes

on to list the Commandments in the order used by many Judeo-Christian groups. Moreover, the bottom of the monument includes two Stars of David and the Greek letters Chi and Rho, which, when superimposed, stand for Christ. Even though the five Justices, the Texas government, and the Bush administration thought the Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of Texas State Capitol was constitutional, the monument is likely to make an incorrect impression that the government supports a specific religion because it is the only religious monument among other monuments on the public ground. It is possible to keep the monument s historical and secular meaning even if it is moved to a private property. Therefore, I suggest the Texas government move the monument to a private ground. A major survey found that the percentage of American adults who are Christian dropped; from about 80% in 2007 to 70% in 2014. At the same time, the amount of atheists or agnostics has shot up from 16% to 23% during the same period. There has also been a small increase in non-christian faiths, for example, Muslims and Hindus. Thesenumbers tell us that it is time to draw a line between church and state in favor of religious diversity. Actually, a clear separation between church and state is what the American forefathers pursued. In the United States Constitution, there is no mention of Christianity, but there are two references to religioncoming from exclusionary wording. One of them is the First Amendment saying, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion... Theotheris Article VI, Section 3 saying,... no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States. Also, a clause in the Treaty of Tripoli stated, "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." Considering this evidence, favoring Christianity in the American legal system is against the constitutional framers will and their aims for religious

diversity. I believe that an America founded on Christian beliefs is a forged myth publicized according to the interests of corporations, Christian leaders, and politicians.it is time for American politicians and judges to commemorate the founding fathers unsectarian constitutional ideal to fuse the talents from various religious backgrounds, which makes America powerful. References Laband, D.N. and Heinbuch, D.H. (1987).Blue Laws: The History, Economics, and Politics of Sunday Closing Laws. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books. Larson, E.J. (1997). Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate Over Science and Religion. Cambridge,Mass.: Harvard University Press. Oliveri, L.N. (2006). Ten Commandments: Supreme Court Opinion and Briefs with Indexes. New York, NY: Nova Publishers. Chemerinsky, E. (2010). The Conservative Assault on the Constitution.New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

The Impact of Brexit on the Relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union Kim Bo-Sung Interpretation and Translation for International Trade and Relations in English-Speaking Areas Ⅰ. Introduction On May 7, 2015, contrary to expects that the United Kingdom(UK) s General Election will be a close run match between Conservative Party and Labour Party, David Cameron s Conservative Party easily accounts for solely nearly half of the total of the UK Parliament. Because of this Conservative Party s big victory on UK General Election, UK Prime Minister, David Cameron s pledge about relationship with the European Union (EU) is expected to gain enough strength. Why this year s UK General Election is an important issue is that on World Economic Forum (Davos Forum) in 2013, Prime Minister Cameron insisted that if Conservative Party wins General Election on 2015, we will do a referendum by 2017 about whether UK remains the EU or not. In reality, British exit from the EU (Brexit) is an issue of hot potato not only in UK but also in Europe. Because the UK has usually done many actions contrary to the will of federal policies 5 such as using Pound contrary to many EU countries use Euro. Moreover, the appearance and growth of the UK Independence Party (UKIP), which has a position of right-wing populism and insists that UK must get independence from the EU, spurs the exit from the EU. In this paper, we will look at the reasons why UK attempts to exit from the EU and how this movement affects both the UK and the EU. 5 Federal means that EU should highlight importance of Organization. In contrary to Federal, intergovernmentalists insist that EU should recognize the role of each member country s government.

Ⅱ. The History of relationship between the UK and the EU In order to understand the issue of Brexit, we need to look at the history of relationship between the UK and the EU. European Union s origin throws back from 1946 Zurich, the then Prime Minister, Winston Churchill s speech. Churchill mentions the concept of United States of Europe, and states that Europe needs the united organization of Europe like the United Nations (UN). It implies that the EU s concept didn t come from France or Germany, but the UK. This concept was realized in 1951. French foreign Minister, Robert Schuman, suggested a concept about common coal and steel market to prevent conflict and contribute peace to European continent. As a result, the Treaty of Paris was reached to agreement and 6 nations (France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Netherland, and Luxembourg) were participated in the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). This ECSC was reached to Treaty of Rome which the EEC was founded and related to common market. Contrary to France and German found the ECSC and the EEC, in order to counteract these organizations, the UK established the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) with 6 nations (Austria, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, and Portugal) in 1960. But the EFTA countries are not close each other and there is no evident goal to united organization. Moreover, there was a low economic result as UK s expectation 6, the UK decided to join the EU, But this scheme faced an opposite position, as French President, Charles De Gaulle gave a negative stance to join the UK in the EU. De Gaulle thought that as the UK was close with the USA, if the EU accepts to join the UK, the USA may get a chance to enlarge their power and proceed throughout European continent. The UK was an obstacle to De Gaulle as he thought that in order to revive France s glory United Europe, which was excluded from the USA, the UK and the Soviet Union, was vital point. Moreover, France thought that if the UK participates, a lot of agricultural products from the Commonwealth states may be brought into the EU states include France, which lead to negative effect to French agricultural structure. Because of this reason, the UK s accession was done after death of President De Gaulle in 1973. To the UK s viewpoint, process of accession was the start of dissonance with other countries in the EU. But there was a next stage of conflict between the UK and the EU. The main related to this thing was former UK Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher who had a negative view to the EU s uniting direction. She thought thatfederal EU is not ideal because it discords with her opinion, neo-liberalism which highlights small government, efficient competitiveness. And she mentioned that the EU must not be bigger than coverage of economic integration. Thatcher did many things to oppose EU s policy, such as struggling to diminish net contribution to European Commission s budget and opposing to join the Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) which she thought it may cause economic recession to the UK. Because of this negative acting to the EU, however, Thatcher resigned from Prime Minister after conflict with Conservative Party. After Thatcher s resignation, Conservative Party s UK decided to join the ERM on October 5 th 1990. And currently, the UK ratified Maastricht Treaty on February 7 th 1992 as one of the member states of United Organization of European continent, and also ratified Lisbon Treaty on October 19 th 2007 which is a process of political 6 Among countries between EFTA, because there was few exchanging each country, international trade was highly lower than EU s. So, many EFTA countries moved to EU except for Norway.