Communities of message senders and recipients in legal settings and their communicative needs. The translator’s perspective
-
Aleksandra Matulewska
Abstract
This presentation will be devoted to types of communities communicating in legal settings for various purposes. The author will focus on the communicative needs of message senders and recipients and communication strategies they may employ from the translator’s perspective. The focus of the presentation will be placed on the communication reality and the choice of the translation strategy which should be applied in the translation or interpretation process. The research hypothesis is put forward that the more homogeneous the communicative community of message senders and recipients is, the easier the translator’s choices in respect to the translation strategy are. Consequently, the more heterogenous the communicative community is, the more difficult it is to meet the expectations of all members of the community in question. The process of choosing sufficient equivalents requires determining the communicative needs of communication process participants. However, sometimes needs and expectations of communication process participants are contradictory. Additionally, not identifying communication problems properly may result in dire consequences affecting the life of persons involved in the process of communication in legal settings. The relations binding participants to communication may be very complex. The consequences of improper identification of communicative needs of message senders and recipients will be illustrated with real-life examples of such distortions in legal communication.
Funding statement: The research financed from the research grant no. DEC-2012/07/E/HS2/00678.
Acknowledgement
Parametrization of legilinguistic translatology in the scope of civil law and civil procedure awarded by the National Science Centre of the Republic of Poland (Sonata Bis program).
References
Bańczerowski, J. 1996. A formal approach to a general theory of language. In R. Sackmann (ed.), Theoretical linguistics and grammatical description. Papers in honour of Hans-Heinrich Lieb. Current issues in linguistic theory, vol. 138, 13–30. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/cilt.138.04banSuche in Google Scholar
Bańczerowski, J. & A. Matulewska. 2012. Towards the foundations of legilinguistic translatology. In P. Grzegorczyk, K. Knoppek & M. Walasik (eds.), Proces cywilny. Nauka – Kodyfikacja – Praktyka. Księga jubileuszowa dedykowana Profesorowi Feliksowi Zedlerowi, 1225–1261. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer Polska.Suche in Google Scholar
Bańczerowski, J., J. Pogonowski & T. Zgółka. 1982. Wstęp do językoznawstwa. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.Suche in Google Scholar
Bańczerowski, Jerzy. 2001. The Linguistic Legacy of Ludwik Zabrocki. In Stanisław Puppel (ed.), The Ludwik Zabrocki Memorial Lecture, 9–49. Poznań: Adam Mickiewicz University.Suche in Google Scholar
Biel, Ł. 2010. Corpus-based studies of legal language for translation purposes: Methodological and practical potential. In C. Heine & J. Engberg (eds.), Reconceptualizing LSP: Online proceedings of the XVII European LSP Symposium 2009. Aarhus: Aarhus School of Business, Aarhus University.Suche in Google Scholar
Biel, Ł. 2013. Tekst prawny jako hipertekst – o intertekstualności tłumaczeń prawnych na przykładzie międzynarodowych instrumentów z zakresu handlu ludźmi. Comparative Legilinguistics: International Journal for Legal Communication 13. 121–136.10.14746/cl.2013.13.08Suche in Google Scholar
Bogusławski, A. 1986. O pojęciu wyjaśniania i wyjaśnianiu w lingwistyce. Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Językoznawczego XL. 45–51.Suche in Google Scholar
Cheng, L., W. Cheng & K. K. Sin. 2014. Revisiting legal terms: A semiotic perspective. Semiotica 202. 167–182.10.1515/sem-2014-0051Suche in Google Scholar
Delisle, J., H. Lee-Jahnke & M. C. Cormier (eds.). 1999. Translation Terminology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Suche in Google Scholar
Dybiec-Gajer, J. 2013. Zmierzyć przekład? Z metodologii oceniania w dydaktyce przekładu pisemnego. Kraków: Universitas.Suche in Google Scholar
Garzone, G. 2000. Legal translation and functionalist approaches: A contradiction in terms. ASTTI/ETI (2000). 395–414.Suche in Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. 1959. On linguistic aspects of translation. In Reuben A. Brower (ed.), Ontranslation, 232–239. New York: Oxford University Press.10.4159/harvard.9780674731615.c18Suche in Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. 2009[1959]. O językoznawczych aspektach przekładu. In P. Bukowski & M. Heydel (eds.), Współczesne teorie przekładu. Antologia, 43–49. Kraków: WydawnictwoZnak.Suche in Google Scholar
Katan, D. 1999. Translating cultures. An introduction for translators, interpreters and mediators. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.Suche in Google Scholar
Kierzkowska, D. 2002. Tłumaczenie prawnicze. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo TEPIS.Suche in Google Scholar
Kłos, P., P. Korcz-Nowak & A. Matulewska. 2007. A. Translation problems in polish language versions of EU directives regulating medicine and biology related issues. In Język, Komunikacja, Informacja, 67–76. Poznań: Wydawnictwo SORUS [SORUS Publishing House].Suche in Google Scholar
Kubacki, A. D. 2012. Tłumaczenie poświadczone. Status, kształcenie, warsztat i odpowiedzialność tłumacza przysięgłego. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer Business.Suche in Google Scholar
Kubacki, A. D. 2013. Teksty paralelne jako narzędzie pomocnicze przy sporządzaniu tłumaczeń specjalistycznych. Comparative Legilinguistics 13. 137–148.10.14746/cl.2013.13.09Suche in Google Scholar
Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. (ed.). 2005. Podstawy językoznawstwa komputerowego. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.Suche in Google Scholar
Matulewska, A. 2007. Lingua legis in translation. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Publishing House.Suche in Google Scholar
Matulewska, A. 2013. Legilinguistic translatology. A parametric approach to legal translation. Linguistic Insights, vol. 171. Bern: Peter Lang.10.3726/978-3-0351-0535-3Suche in Google Scholar
Matulewska, A. 2014. Horrory tłumaczeniowe czy tłumacze z piekła rodem? Czyli kilka słów o efektywność komunikacji interlingwalnej. Scripta Neophilologica Posnaniensia XIV. 101–118.10.14746/snp.2014.14.06Suche in Google Scholar
Matulewska, A. 2016. Walking on thin ice of translation of terminology in legal settings. International Journal of Legal Discourse 1(1). 65–85.10.1515/ijld-2016-0001Suche in Google Scholar
Matulewska, A. 2017. Socially induced changes in legal terminology. Studies in logic, grammar and rhetoric. vol. 49(62). 153–173. DOI: 10.1515/slgr-2017-0010.10.1515/slgr-2017-0010Suche in Google Scholar
Matulewska, A. & P. Nowak. 2006. Polskie sprawozdanie finansowe w tłumaczeniu na francuski. Lingua Legi 14. 65–71.Suche in Google Scholar
Nagao, H. 2005. Sprawa z Melbourne: Niewłaściwe tłumaczenie przyczyną oskarżenia o niepopełnione przestępstwa. Translated by Rybińska, Z. Lingua Legis 13. 3–7.Suche in Google Scholar
Neubert, A. 1996. Textlinguistics of translation: The textual approach to translation. In M. G. Rose, (ed.), Translation Horizons Beyond the Boundaries of Translation Spectrum. Translation Perspectives, vol. IX, 87–105. Binghamton: Center for Research in Translation.Suche in Google Scholar
Newmark, P. 1982. Approaches to translation. Oxford: Pergamon Press Ltd.Suche in Google Scholar
Newmark, P. 1988. A textbook of translation. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall International Ltd.Suche in Google Scholar
Newmark, P. 1991. About translation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.Suche in Google Scholar
Porter, J. (1992). Audience and Rhetoric: An Archaeological Composition of the Discourse Community. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Suche in Google Scholar
Roald, J. & S. Whittaker 2010. Verbalization in French and Norwegian legislative texts: A Contrastive case study. In M. Gotti & Ch. Williams (eds.), Legal discourse across languages and cultures: Linguistic insights, vol. 117, 95–107. Bern: Peter Lang.Suche in Google Scholar
Šarčević, S. 2000. New approach to legal translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Suche in Google Scholar
Swales, J. M. 1990. Genre Analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Swales, J. M. “Reflections on the concept of discourse community”. ASp La revue du GERAS (69): 7–19. doi:10.4000/asp.4774. ISSN 1246-8185 (date of access 15 January 2017).10.4000/asp.4774Suche in Google Scholar
Tessuto, G. 2008. Legal concepts and terminography: Analysis and application. In V. K. Bhatia, C. N. Candlin & P. E. Allori, (eds.), Language, culture and the law: The formulation of legal concepts across systems and cultures, 283–302. Bern: Peter Lang.Suche in Google Scholar
Vermeer, H. J. 2001. Skopos and commission in translational action. In L. Venuti & M. Baker (eds.), The translation studies reader, 221–232. London/New York: Routlege.Suche in Google Scholar
Wagner, A., K. K. Sin & L. Cheng. 2014. Cultural transfer and conceptualization in legal discourse. In A. Wagner, K. K. Sin & L. Cheng (eds.), The ashgate handbook of legal translation. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited.Suche in Google Scholar
Zabrocki, L. 1963. Wspólnoty komunikatywne w genezie i rozwoju języka niemieckiego. Część I. Prehistoria języka niemieckiego. Wrocław/Warszawa/Kraków: Zakład Narodowy imienia Ossolińskich Wydawnictwo Polskiej Akademii Nauk.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Introduction
- On drafting, interpreting, and translating legal texts across languages and cultures
- Research Articles
- Discourse, interests, and the law: Some pragma-legal reflections
- Communities of message senders and recipients in legal settings and their communicative needs. The translator’s perspective
- Arguments of statutory interpretation and argumentation schemes
- Transformation of legal language – Early Byzantine legal discourse
- A forensic linguistics problem: Asylum seekers’ dialect identification difficulties in under-documented adjacent Arabic dialects
- Compiling terminology in EU directives and national transplant regulations. Case study: Sweden and Poland
- “There are no words that are ‘clear’ in and of themselves”: Meta-pragmatic comments and semantic analysis in legal interpretation
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Introduction
- On drafting, interpreting, and translating legal texts across languages and cultures
- Research Articles
- Discourse, interests, and the law: Some pragma-legal reflections
- Communities of message senders and recipients in legal settings and their communicative needs. The translator’s perspective
- Arguments of statutory interpretation and argumentation schemes
- Transformation of legal language – Early Byzantine legal discourse
- A forensic linguistics problem: Asylum seekers’ dialect identification difficulties in under-documented adjacent Arabic dialects
- Compiling terminology in EU directives and national transplant regulations. Case study: Sweden and Poland
- “There are no words that are ‘clear’ in and of themselves”: Meta-pragmatic comments and semantic analysis in legal interpretation
