Mots Maudits #13: Efficace

“Efficace”: What does it mean? Effective? Efficient? Efficacious? All of these things? What it the best way to translate it? Let's start by looking at the definition of “efficace”:

1. Se dit d'un produit, d'une méthode, d'un appareil, etc., qui produisent l'effet attendu

; bon pour : Un médicament efficace contre le rhume.

2. Qui remplit bien sa tâche, qui atteint son but, qui aboutit à des résultats utiles.

Now let's look at the definitions of the three suggest English translations I listed above:

1. Effective: producing an intended result.

2. Efficient: working well with minimum waste of money or effort.

3. Efficacious: producing an intended effect.

If we compare the definitions, the first (effective) and third (efficacious) seem to be far closer to the meaning of “efficace”. Indeed, they seem synonymous — so what’s the difference? In terms of usage, “effective” is far more common and can be used to describe a policy, behaviour, or strategy. “Efficacious” is generally limited to a medical context and is used to describe the result of a drug or treatment.

The odd-one-out is “efficient”, which has quite a distinct meaning to do with the ability of a person, group, or machine to get things done with minimum fuss or energy. The term is particularly useful in engineering; a car may be effective at getting from A to B, but if you only get 5 miles per gallon it cannot reasonably be described as being efficient. In sports writing too, a footballer might be termed “efficient” if they require very few chances to score a goal.

To complicate matters, the word “efficient” also exists in French, but it is considered an anglicism in some quarters, despite its Latin root and usage by such luminaries of the French language as Camus and De Gaulle. To be fair, its disrepute is probably due to an Anglo-Saxon linguistic contagion that caused its meaning to shift away from the original sense (which covers pretty much the same ground as “efficace”).

Moreover, despite Larousse being quite clear about the semantic subtleties — and the French “efficient” undeniably providing a useful semantic distinction that didn't previously exist — there seems to be some uncertainty among some French copywriters about the respective meanings of “efficient” and “efficace”.

In any case, for this reason, the two terms are often used interchangeably, so it is worth considering the author’s intended message before translating. Sometimes the context will make it clear that they mean “efficient”, not “effective”. Unfortunately, “efficace” is somewhat over-used in corporate French, so this is a question that translators have to ask themselves all too often.