A Few Remarks on Legal Translation and Intercultural Encounters

Iwona Witczak-Plisiecka

doi:10.18778/1731-7533.18.3.02

Authors

Iwona Witczak-Plisiecka University of Lodz

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1731-7533.18.3.02

Keywords:

equivalence, legal language, legal translation

Abstract

The text offers comments on legal translation and its special nature. It is argued that legal translation is much different from other types of specialised translations. Unlike the language of engineering or medicine, legal language does not only refer to the related specialised practice, i.e. the law, but constitutes legal reality, being at the same time an instrument with which legal disputes are resolved. In the context of translation, legal language is particularly challenging as the process of finding equivalence is not restricted to interlinguistic level, but invites both intralinguistic and intersemiotic considerations. Moving not only between different natural languages, but also between different legal cultures, legal translators have to face problems that can often be naturally found in intercultural communication.

Author Biography

Iwona Witczak-Plisiecka, University of Lodz

Iwona Witczak-Plisiecka is associate professor at the University of Lodz, Poland, head of Department of English Language and Applied Linguistics. Her research interests include sociolinguistics, speech acts and actions and their theoretical accounts in the interface of semantics and linguistic pragmatics. She is also interested in communication in semantically-restricted domains, and legal translation in theory and practice.

References

Austin, John L. 1962/1975. How to Do Things with Words. The William James Lectures delivered at Harvard University in 1955, 2nd ed., edited by J.O. Urmson and Marina Sbisa. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Google Scholar

Bakhtin, Mikhail. M. 1981. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays [ed. by M. Holquist; trans. C. Emerson and M. Holquist]. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Google Scholar

Bakhtin, Mikhail M. 1986. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays [ed. by C. Emerson and M. Holquist; trans. V. W. McGee]. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad & Edward Finegan (1999) Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.
Google Scholar

Cao, Deborah. 2007. Translating Law. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853599552

Charrow, Robert P. & Veda R. Charrow. 1979. “Making Legal Language Understandable: A Psycholinguistic Study of Jury Instructions”. Columbia Law Review. Vol. 79, No. 7, pp. 1306-1374. https://doi.org/10.2307/1121842 ; https://www.jstor.org/stable/1121842
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1121842

Crystal, David. 2018. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108528931
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108528931

Danet, Brenda. 1980. “Language in the legal process”. Law and Society Review 14, pp. 445–564. https://www.jstor.org/stable/i354491 ; https://doi.org/10.2307/3053192
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3053192

Endicott, Timothy A.O. 2000. Vagueness in Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198268406.001.0001
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198268406.001.0001

Fetzer, Anita & Iwona Witczak-Plisiecka. 2021 (in press). “Argumentative, Political and Legal Discourse”. In: The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ed. by M. Haugh, D. Kádár & M. Terkourafi. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 520-543.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108954105.027

Frank, Jerome N. 1947. “Words and music: Some remarks on statutory interpretation”. Columbia Law Review. No. 8, pp. 1259-1278. https://doi.org/10.2307/1118098
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1118098

Gibbons, John. 2003. Forensic Linguistics: An Introduction to Language in the Justice System. London: Blackwell.
Google Scholar

Gotti, Maurizio. (2003) Specialized Discourse. Linguistic Features and Changing Conventions. Bern: Peter Lang.
Google Scholar

Hart, Herbert L. A. 1961/1994. The Concept of Law (2nd ed.). Oxford/New York: Clarendon Press.
Google Scholar

Huddleston, Rodney, Geoffrey K. Pullum et al. (2002) The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: CUP.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316423530

Hutton, Christopher. 1995. ‘Law lessons for linguists? Accountability and acts of professional communication’, Language and Communication 16(3): 205–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/0271-5309(96)00010-9
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0271-5309(96)00010-9

Hutton, Chris. 2009. Language, Meaning and the Law. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780748633524

Jakobson, Roman. 1959. “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation”. In: On Translation, ed. by R. A. Brower. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, pp. 232-239.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674731615.c18

Jopek-Bosiacka, Anna. 2019 Teoretyczno-prawne I logiczne uwarunkowania przekładu prawnego. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer.
Google Scholar

Lauchman, Richard. 2001-2005. Plain Language. A handbook for writers in the U.S. Government. Available at http://www.lauchmangroup.com/PDFfiles/PLHandbook.PDF (accessed May 2007).
Google Scholar

Mellinkoff, David. 1963. The Language of the Law. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.
Google Scholar

Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenboum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik (1992) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London & New York: Longman.
Google Scholar

Robinson, Stanley. 1973. Drafting: Its application to conveyancing and commercial documents. London: Butterworths.
Google Scholar

Sarcevic, Susan. 1997. New Approach to Legal Translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.
Google Scholar

Sugarman, David & H.L.A. Hart. 2005. “Hart Interviewed: H.L.A. Hart in Conversation with David Sugarman” (interview 1988) Journal of Law and Society, Vol. 32, No. 2 (Jun., 2005), pp. 267-293 http://ezproxy.library.nyu.edu:2063/stable/3557228
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6478.2005.00324.x

Tiersma, Peter M. 1999. Legal Language. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Google Scholar

Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. 2001 (ms). Semantic and Pragmatic Aspects of Speech Acts in English Legal Texts. PhD dissertation, University of Lodz, Poland.
Google Scholar

Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. 2005. “English legal texts in translation—the relevance-theoretic approach” Relevance Studies in Poland 2, pp. 169-181.
Google Scholar

Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. 2007. “Linguistic Aspects of the deontic shall in the legal context” In: Language and the Law: International Outlooks, ed. by K. Kredens and S. Goźdź-Roszkowski.. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, pp. 181-199.
Google Scholar

Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. 2008. “The Relevance of Vague Expressions in the Law” Research in Language 6, pp. 167-187.
Google Scholar

Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. 2009. "Legal Speech Acts in a Cognitive Linguistic Perspective - Focus on Modality" Comparative Legilinguistics (International Journal for Legal Communication) 1: 1, pp. 159-175.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/cl.2009.01.12

Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. 2013a. From Speech Acts to Speech Actions. Łódź: Lodz University Press.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/7969-092-3

Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. 2013b. “Speech action in legal contexts”. In Marina Sbisà & K. Turner (eds.), Pragmatics of Speech Actions [Handbook of pragmatics; Part 2], Berlin/Boston: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 613-658.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214383.613

Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. 2016. “The interface of language and culture in the legal context–some teaching implications”. In: Languages, Culture, Media, ed. by M. Kopytowska, B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, J. Osborne, J. Schmied, K. Yumlu. Chambéry: Editions de l’Université de Savoie Mont Blanc, pp. 323-338, ISBN: 978-2-919732-75-3
Google Scholar

Wojtczak, Sylwia & Iwona Witczak-Plisiecka. 2019. “Metaphors and Legal Language: A few comments on ordinary, specialised, and legal meaning”. Research in Language 17: 3, pp. 273-295. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/1731-7533.17.3.04
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/1731-7533.17.3.04

Wojtczak, Sylwia, Iwona Witczak-Plisiecka, Rafał Augustyn. 2017. Metafory konceptualne jako narzędzia rozumowania i poznania prawniczego [Conceptual Metaphors as Tools in Legal Reasoning and Cognition]. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer.
Google Scholar

Wróblewski, Jerzy, 1948. Język prawny i prawniczy. Kraków: Polska Akademia Umiejętności.
Google Scholar

Wróblewski, Jerzy. 1959. Zagadnienia teorii wykładni prawa ludowego. Warszawa.
Google Scholar

Wróblewski, Jerzy. 1984. “Zagadnienia terminologii nauk prawnych” [Terminology issues in legal sciences]. Nauka Polska 3, pp. 80-82.
Google Scholar

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=149&invol=304 (accessed February 2019)
Google Scholar

CLARITY: http://www.clarity-international.net/journals/56.pdf (accessed May 2016)
Google Scholar

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1999/22/notes/contents (Justice Act 1999; accessed February 2019)
Google Scholar

https://www.worldwidewords.org/articles/probono.htm (accessed June 2010)
Google Scholar

InfoCuria Case-Law; C-127/04 – O’Byrne; https://curia.europa.eu (accessed February 2019)
Google Scholar

law.com.dictionary (accessed May 2016)
Google Scholar

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/508/223/ (on Smith vs. United States (508 U.S. 223) accessed February 2019)
Google Scholar

http://www.lateralmag.com/articles/issue-29/when-whales-were-fish (accessed February 2019)
Google Scholar