TERMINOLOGY WORKING GROUP (TWG) Based on STUDY GROUP 3 BILC Conference VILNIUS May 2011 Stockholm, Oct 2013 Josef ERNST, AUT

1. Situation AAP-6 Glossary of Terms and Definitions is not satisfying. Many terms that require definitions, e.g. in ATP-3.2.1 Allied Land Tactics, are not listed in AAP-6. Many dictionaries, word lists, glossaries etc. with inconsistencies existing Updating process takes much time! Cannot rely on NSA only.

2. Guidelines for national WGs Start with ATP-3.2.1 Allied Land Tactics (Ed. Nov 2009). Those terms that required definitions were extracted from the perspective of a non- military language teacher or translator. Terms contained in ATP-3.2.1 but not listed in AAP-6 were primarily taken from JP 1-02 Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. Unless listed there, they could be taken from FM 1-02 Operational Terms and Graphics.

2. Guidelines for national WGs Unless listed in AAP-6, JP 1-02, FM 1-02 or similar national documents, terms were quoted with no definitions. Terms quoted with no definitions were defined in English by the respective working group, considering the context of ATP 3.2.1. National working groups (should) have included linguistic and military experts.

3. Evaluation WG results are to be posted on the BILC website. Evaluation has to be done by military English native speakers. Evaluation committee´s task: - avoid multiple entries - proofread for plausibility Next document: AJP-01(D) Allied Joint Doctrine for Land Operations (Ed. Oct 2009)

4. Roadmap ATP 3.2.1 Allied Land Tactics Extraction Alignment Evaluation BILC website AJP 1.0 (D) Allied Joint Doctrine

5. Way Ahead Evaluated results in English to be published on BILC website. Nations establish equivalencies in their respective languages on the English basis created with the help of ATP-3.2.1 and AAP-6 (only for national training purposes aiming at interoperability). Benefit for national teachers and translators from a multilingual database. Later on: NSA process.

Any Questions?