Abstract
The article assesses the epistemological distance between, on the one hand, general linguistics and traductology – as a field that has already exhausted all possibilities offered by linguistics and opened itself to wider disciplines, such as anthropology or cultural studies – and, on the other hand, law, whose hermetic and impermeable character has closed legal science to any enriching interdisciplinary interaction. I will first argue that linguistics asks valuable questions to be considered by lawyers and has developed original borderline concepts that lawyers themselves could integrate in their research. Second, I will suggest that, by using their specific tools, linguists are perfectly equipped to offer a valuable image of typically legal use of language while, quite to the contrary, law’s hermeticism has forced lawyers to develop schemes of intelligibility that are restrictive as far as a nuanced approach to language is concerned. Within the scope of this article, translation refers both to the attempt to describe one field through the relevant concepts of another and to translation studies proper, a field within which newly gained concepts belonging specifically to cultural legal traductology and originating in the field of discourse analysis may prove to be pertinent for legal interpretation.
Published Version
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 call