What is in a name? The case of the impossible translation of the concept of ‘forma di Stato’

The academia is traditionally a global forum, where scholars coming from different legal cultures meet, and discuss contemporary constitutional issues. With English now being the lingua franca for quite some decades, new criticalities in the field of translation have arisen for continental Europe scholars. The significant differences between continental Europe constitutionalism from the one hand and Anglo-American constitutionalism from the other hand has a major impact in the discussion of specific legal concepts of the former, which do not have a corresponding concept in the latter. Hence, the need to resort to other words/expressions, which however are unable to properly translate into English all the nuances of the European concept. A major example is the continental European concept of “forma di Stato”, which has rarely appeared in English outlets as “form of state”, while it is now usually translated as “constitutional identity” or “fundamental principles”. This translation into English is so far the better option; nevertheless, it is unfit to properly convey the European concept. In particular, either term does not clarify that the “forma di Stato” also denotes the original (political) imprinting that shapes a) fundamental ends of a given political community and b) the relationship between public authorities and their citizenry. Against this backdrop, the Chapter aims at discussing alternative approaches to solve translation issues of concepts such as “forma di Stato” to properly convey key concepts of European constitutionalism and make them fully understandable to the Anglo-American legal culture.