Abstract
This paper aims to determine the extent to which a corpus-based, phraseological approach can be effectively applied to discriminate among near-synonymous, semantically-related terms which often prove troublesome when translating legal texts. Based on a substantial multi-genre corpus of American legal texts, this study examines the collocational patterns of four legal terms ‘breach’, ‘contravention’, ‘infringement’ and ‘violation’, first in the genre of contracts and then in the multi-genre context of the entire corpus. The findings highlight the area of overlap as well as specificity in the usage of these terms. While collocational constraints can be argued to play an important disambiguating role in the semantic and functional analysis of both source and target text items carried out by translators prior to the interlingual translation, this study emphasizes the applicability of the phraseological approach to English source texts.
Highlights
In his well-known book on legal language, professor Peter Tiersma (1999), both a lawyer and a linguist, notes, with brutal candour, that “the legal profession has a very schizophrenic attitude toward synonyms” (p. 113)
Translators dealing with legal language inevitably face a bewildering range of synonymous or near-synonymous terms or words appearing in virtually all legal texts
The presence of near-synonymous lexis in English legal texts is likely to be confusing for various types of readers including law students and law professionals as well as translators (Chromà, 2011)
Summary
In his well-known book on legal language, professor Peter Tiersma (1999), both a lawyer and a linguist, notes, with brutal candour, that “the legal profession has a very schizophrenic attitude toward synonyms” (p. 113). Law professionals are encouraged to follow the fundamental rule of legal writing, that is, same meaning same form, whereby the same term should be used consistently in reference to a given concept. The importance of the concept of near-synonymy to legal translation is well-recognised. Translators dealing with legal language inevitably face a bewildering range of synonymous or near-synonymous terms or words appearing in virtually all legal texts. The presence of near-synonymous lexis in English legal texts is likely to be confusing for various types of readers including law students and law professionals Magris (2004) is one of few notable contributions which recognizes the fact that properly constructed and reliable language resources (such as terminological databases) should cater to the specific terminological needs of legal translators Existing specialized lexicographical resources are usually of limited use as they do not effectively clarify the nuances of meaning and usage involved in such terms. Magris (2004) is one of few notable contributions which recognizes the fact that properly constructed and reliable language resources (such as terminological databases) should cater to the specific terminological needs of legal translators
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series – Themes in Translation Studies
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
