I encountered that phrase in the following context. The first numbered item in an unofficial translation of the "Casablanca Protocol"of 1965 says: "(1) Whilst retaining their Palestinian nationality, Palestinians currently residing in the land of ___________ have the right of employment on part with its citizens."

Was that supposed to say "on par with"?

Although it is an unofficial translation, it appears at a United Nations website: https://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/E373EB5C166347AE85256E36006948BA

If United Nations webpages aren't maintained by people who can figure out what is an error to be corrected, and what is correct and should stand unchanged with an explanation added in commentary, then questions like this will continue to arise.

Perhaps I am reading too carefully? Is there a general idea that includes both "on par with" and "on part with"?

Perhaps topics involving Palestinians are thought to be light entertainment to fill up time in television news coverage, and not worth looking at carefully?

  • 2
    I suggest it is a typo: on par with ... – Weather Vane Oct 25 '19 at 9:24
  • 2
    Looks like a typo, even professionals can make mistakes...I don't think it's worth assuming that it's the result of some wider agenda. – KillingTime Oct 25 '19 at 9:24
  • 1
    Remember that most typographers and clerks do not have the authority to change a text they have been asked to administer. – Weather Vane Oct 25 '19 at 9:26
  • 1
    This version link shows 'par' – Michael Harvey Oct 25 '19 at 10:43
  • @Michael Harvey Thank you! I wonder how many battles have been fought because of misprints in translations of holy texts. – Ren Eh Daycart Oct 25 '19 at 10:59

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.