Everybody knows that english is the official language of the telematic territories. In fact, in the electronic country, english is leveling down other languages to a status of cultural accessories.

On the other hand, english itself suffers from this supremacy. English speaking people do not all and always rejoy from it : some think their language can reach its real potential and beauty when unfold in a appropriate context, when the receiver can decrypt the subtelties of the code. The systematic use of basic english as a practical interface in international meetings and other transcultural projects gives them a feeling of devalorisation of their language. It seems to be pruned down to become a sort of "Technical Esperanto" when used as a spare talk, poetry being pushed out by the "english as a second language" mill that everybody uses thinking everybody else will understand (!).

Given the inescapable growth of the international ramifications of the communication networks, a question arises : beyond the technical problems and beyond the xenophobe reflexes that seem to pop out everywhere these days when one speaks about the idea of a mother tongue, what fundamental cultural process is the basis for the use of the new exchange networks ? How could this process -from which iceberg the problem with written or spoken language is only the tip- be questionned and informed by an artistic and cultural manifestation ? How could an artistic and cultural manifestation be questionned and informed by it ?

The utopia of the parallel use of all spoken or written languages has to be put aside from the very beginning : cultures survive by movement or die. The idea of keeping them side to side without crossbreeding is not viable. On the other hand, this very movement from one language to the other, this exchange that constantly crosses that bridge called translation, seems to be the keystone that allows the permanent feeding of the new codes from the cultural values that are imbeded in every language. And the crossing of the bridge itself could be the carrier of meaning instead of the particular definition of the destination. In the end, translation, not as a end result but as a movement, as an energy and a vector, appears to be a form of meta-language that could well be the foundation for any futur exchanges, since the now accepted multiplication of reference contexts forces in the use of translation strategies even when the exchange takes place in a single linguistic territory.(1)

(1) It is common knowledge that understanding and being understood is not so easy between people that speak a same language but come from different countries. We now see the same problems arise between people from a same geographical territory : technical competences, reference domains, specific constraint from the media themselves make that a form of translationi s constantly required when a physician talks to a patient, when a computer tech talks to a customer, when an artist talks to a politician. This process is not new, but the aknowledgment of its existence and the understanding of its importance now forces doctors to take special courses in discussion techniques, for instance, or computer tech to train in user-friendly interface design, or artists...