Translation between Internationalization and Localization
On the Example of the Terminological Units Related to the Contemporary Juridical-Economic “Transplants”
Keywords:civil law , common law, Quebecoise, translation, trust-like device
The contemporary globalizing processes are oriented to the transformation from local or regional into worldly or international. Technological advancements, elimination of boundaries, innovative economic and political strategies stipulate the emergence of changes in almost all spheres of life. The innovative tendencies appear in the field of translation, which reflects the historical changes connected to the globalizing processes and mediates between the linguistic-conceptual internationalization and localization. The global aspiration towards the unification and integration results in spreading today’s lingua franca (the English language) and in rendering some concepts or institutions unique to the common law context. The uniqueness of common law can be visualized in the difficulties of transmission of the concepts and translation from English into all other European languages necessitated by the appearance of the legal or economic transplants – the civilian “counterparts” of certain Anglo-American institutions.
The paper discusses some aspects of the translation, which play a crucial role in shaping the contemporary juridical-economic tendencies, but greatly “suffer” from the influence of the emerging paradigm of “transplants”. The major emphasis is put on the semantic peculiarities of the terms related to the common law trust and its Quebecois “counterpart” (fiducie).
Bajčić, M. (2018). The role of EU legal English in shaping EU legal culture. International Journal of Language & Law, 7, 8-24.
Benítez, P. F. (2009). The cognitive shift in terminology and specialized translation. MonTI.
Biel, Ł. (2008). Legal terminology in translation practice: dictionaries, googling or discussion forums? SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation, 3 (1), 22-34.
Bondarenko, A. O. (2016). The main difficulties in translation of legal texts. In O. Barabash, T. Dubrovskaia, A. Diatlova, N. Pavlova (Eds.), Language. Law. Society (pp. 87-88). Penza.
Cheng, L., Sin, K., & Cheng, W. (2014). Legal translation: a sociosemiotic approach. Semiotica, 17-33.
Civil Code of Quebec. (1991). http://ccq.lexum.com/w/ccq/en#!fragment//KGhhc2g6KGNodW5rxIVhbsSHb3JUZXh0OicnKSxub3Rlc1F1ZXJ5xJYnLHNjcm9sbEPEiMSKOiFuxKdlYXLEh8SgxKLEpMSXxLTEtsSHU8SQdELEpFJFTEVWQU5DRSx0YWI6dG9jKSk=
Claxton, J. B. (2002). Langage du droit de la fiducie. Revue du Barreau, 62, 273-317.
Convention on the law applicable to trusts and their recognition. (n.d.). http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php?act=conventions.text&cid=59.
Devaux, A., Becker, D., & Ryznar, M. (2014). The trust as more than a common law creature. Ohio University Law Review, 41(1), 91-119.
Emerich, Y. (2013). The civil law trust: a modality of ownership or an interlude to ownership? In L. Smith (Ed.), The Worlds of the Trust (pp. 21-40). Cambridge University Press.
Ganado, M. (n.d.). How civil law systems absorb trust. http://www.ganadoadvocates.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/How-Civil-law-Systems-Absorb-Trusts.pdf
Giampieri, P. (2016). Is the European legal English legalese-free? Italian Journal of Public Law, 8, 424-440.
Häcker, B. (2009). Consequences of impaired consent transfers: a structural comparison of English and German law. Mohr Siebeck.
Lloyd, C. B, & Pawley, H. (2005). When legal systems meet: bijuralism in the Canadian federal system. BCN Political Science Debates, 4, 147-170.
Lubetsky, M. (2012). Categorically different: unintended consequences of trust taxonomy. In L. Smith (Ed.), Re-imagining the Trust: Trusts in Civil Law (pp. 340-354). Cambridge University Press.
Lupoi, M. (2000). Trusts: a comparative study. Cambridge University Press.
Nykyri, S. (2010). Equivalence and translation strategies in multilingual thesaurus construction. Åbo Akedemy University Press.
Roy, M. P. (2010). Quebec. In A. Kaplan (Eds.), Trusts in prime jurisdictions. Globe Business Publishing LTD.
Temmerman, R. (2000). Towards new ways of terminology description: the sociocognitive approach. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Gray, Ch. B. (Ed.). (2004). The philosophy of law: an encyclopedia. Taylor & Francis e-Library.
The Private Law Dictionary. (n.d.). https://nimbus.mcgill.ca/pld-ddp/dictionary/search
Thévenoz, L. (2009). Trusts: the rise of a global legal concept. Carolina Academic Press.
Vogel F., Hamann, H., & Gauer. I. (2017). Computer-assisted legal linguistics: corpus analysis as a new tool for legal studies. Law & Social Inquiry, 43 (S1), 1340-1363.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2021 Journal of Narrative and Language Studies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.