The European Union’s funds provide money for many good purposes. However, they don’t want to make access to money too easy; the applicant must first cope with the fund’s argot. Even the titles are daunting: “The Application Submission Period Related to ESF Nationwide Measures within the Administrative Sector of the FNBE”. The EU carefully avoids using common words and likes to repeat its own abstract constructs, such as the Structural Funds Program. Rather than bothering to explain expressions such as specific horizontal themes, readers are linked to multi-page strategic documents and program papers, which in turn will drag along their own load of leaden terminology. Such bureaucratic padding keeps the real world far away, although actual examples would bring the project-nonsense back to earth. The most important issue for those who order the creation of these documents is probably creating an image of conscientious professionalism, the development of innovation potential without interrupting the process with actual deeds. What’s worse, the outcome of a project’s being funded consists only of new publications and papers, not actual activity that addresses some issue. – Why is this so difficult? The multi-lingual EU environment is exceptionally demanding. If a writer is working with these difficult texts, he should get protective clothing and scheduled periods for recovery. Long-term exposure to the EU textual environment jeopardizes any sense of linguistic sensitivity. Or sensibility.