Hi, nickel, Themis and cougr.
Yes, let's please wrap this up.
I had already decided to stop posting, in fact, but revisited this thread to read your previous post, nickel, and then found myself responding to it, as well as to one of Themi's assertions that stuck out at me. I wish I didn't, sorry.
IMHO (FWIW), and sorry to conclude on a controversial note, but I'm going to be frank (I'm tired of being Chris, i.e., cantankerous).
nickel wrote ...
Now, I don't know where they went wrong (mistranslating something somewhere, I presume) but they cannot really mean “committee for Parliamentary Cooperation” when there is nothing about “parliamentary cooperation” in the rest of the text.
No, they meant it. There was no mistranslation on their part. This is in fact the only way to interpret the PCC, in general terms.
I honestly don't mind if you've discounted/dismissed everything I've posted, but I honestly cant understand how you're so readily dismissing a. the syntax rule (which is 100% reliable), b. the prevailing opinion, and now c. this, the above?
Because I can't, and as I realise that a, b and c all point in the same direction, I conclude:
1. In general terms, the Parliamentary Cooperation Committee should be interpreted as the Committee for Parliamentary Cooperation.
I have little doubt about this. This is in general terms, note.
2. In specific terms:
The Parliamentary Committee for EU-Ukraine Cooperation (I'm referring here to one of your cited excerpts).
I think this sits happily alongside the Committee for Parliamentary Cooperation, the general interpretation for the PCC.
This is because I sense that this EU-Ukraine cooperation is always at the parliamentary level, even if not stated specifically, it's always nevertheless implied and understood to be so.
This is also reinforced by "the committee for Parliamentary Cooperation between Ukraine and the EU.", one of the underlined excerpts you've cited (unless we dismiss this too as another thing they didn't mean).
I'm not misinterpreting parliamentary cooperation, here, nickel. Of course it's much wider than the parliamentary work itself.
It's a mechanism which ensures an ongoing cooperation and dialogue between the EU and Ukraine (cougr described this well in in his earlier post).
Through regular meetings of the pcc, the EU and Ukraine may cooperate and coordinate their efforts in the drafting of bills that relate to travel, energy, etc..
Just because it's stated specifically (maybe for convenience, ease of understanding) as the "Parliamentary Committee for EU-Ukraine Cooperation", doesn't mean the pcc should be interpreted as being the Parliamentary Committee for Cooperation.
Why wasn't one of your other specifically stated excerpts chosen instead ? ..i.e., the "committee for Parliamentary Cooperation between Ukraine and the EU"?
If we're speaking in general terms, the pcc is the Committee for Parliamentary Cooperation, every day of the week, IMHO, FWIW (not much, obviously).
