Ôèëîëîãè÷åñêèå íàóêè/6. Àêòóàëüíûå ïðîáëåìû ïåðåâîäà
Kruzhkova Y., Firsova Y.
Juridical vocabulary and
peculiarities of its translation (based on the source of French language)
Problems in general translation field and particularly, in specific
translation, have become important as a result of continuous international
relations development. Rapidly-developing countries need qualified specialists
who have necessary working skills in various spheres of human activity-such as
policy, economy, culture and etc. In our
article we tried to consider some peculiarities of legal instruments
translations to French language.
First of all, it is significant that one should distinguish potentially
achievable equivalence, that means the highest possible content commonness of
texts written in two different languages, commonness which is allowed because
of the languages’ difference; and translating equivalence, - that is,
practicable logical proximity of original text and its translation which is
achieved by a translator in the translating process. Thus, translating
equivalence limit is the highest possible (linguistic) level of the saving
content of the original in translation; however in each separate case of the
translation logical proximity to the original is achieved in a different level
and by various means.
Differences in the foreign and the translated language systems, in
peculiarities of creating texts in each of those languages can limit the
possibility of the perfect content saving of the original in translation. That
is why translating equivalence can be based on saving (and loss, agreeably)
various elements of meaning contained in the original. Depending on which part
of the content is reproduced to provide its equivalence, there are various
levels (types) of equivalence. Translation can ensure interlanguage
communication on any equivalence level.
Thus, any text fulfills some communicative functions: it informs about
certain facts, expresses emotions, establishes connections among people,
expects some reaction or actions from the receptor and etc. Presence of such a purpose in the process of
communication determines patterns of transmitted messages and their linguistic
execution of the contact.
Translation of juridical texts has a long history; its background
originates from antiquity. In modern globalization context droit (legal rights)
is necessary for serving its crucial purpose. After The World War II the
problems of the translation of juridical texts had been discussed and analyzed
by theorists: legal experts, translators, linguists (Gerard-Rene de Groot,
Maastricht, Rodolfo Sacco, Gerard Cornu, Pierre Lerrat, Emmanuel Didier,
Jean-Claude Gémar). The
linguists made the conclusion that - to achieve the absolute equivalent during
the translation of a juridical text is impossible. Like any translation, the
translation of the juridical texts presupposes the interrelation of linguistic
and extralinguistic knowledge. However, during the examination of the lawyer's
and translator's activity, it could be established that they have a common task
– to find the meaning of expression. The law, like translation, - is the
process of interpretation. For example, in order to understand the author's
intention of juridical document, the lawyer has to know the correlation of the
inner and real intention with what was proclaimed, like the translator, who
analyzes what was said and the intention of the author. From the mentioned
above, the linguists distinguish two theoretical postulates:
-
in the law,
some people pay attention to the inner intention, and some to the proclaimed
intention;
-
the theory
of translation is based on the search of expression meaning, trying not to take
into account the linguistic sign.
Studying the translation's phenomena, we often base on
the certain linguistic analysis, which brings us to the impossibility to
translate. The semantic fields of different languages are not the same: it is
impossible to correlate one word in one language with its counterpart in the
language of translation.
Ferdinand de Saussure expressed this postulate: it is necessary to note the impossibility of the linguistic sign in one language to occupy the same place, which the sign occupies, with the help of which it translates to the other language. The sense can be expressed by different means, depending on the language; the "expression" does not mean the same for different categories of readers [1]. E. Nida says: if we are not speaking about the communication in one language, it will never be absolute, because two people will never understand the word equally. That is why we should not search for the total equivalent between two languages [2].
The jurisprudence distinguishes two
main categories of expression: those which belong to the legal sphere and those
which study this sphere. So we can say that the law is the code of society
laws, accepted by the social power. However, the law is also the discipline,
which studies these norms. The terminology plays an important role in normative
expressions and, vice versa, during the study of the sphere one can operate
with the free speech.
If to follow the definition of
the law as a code of norms, it is necessary to emphasize that its place is not
the same in different types of societies. In fact, the law competes with other
social systems – religion or cultural customs. The question that can be settled
in the West with the help of law, in the Middle East will be settled by
religion and in the Far East by culture. The
practical result shows that in the process of inter-cultural transmission,
which is done by an interpreter, the text changes its nature. For example, the
extralegal written text in the Asian society is legal or having a temporary
power in the West, while, institutionally, it belonged to the religion
department. Reasoning from the thing, that the only right instrument is the
language, the interpreter must choose competence, either literary or
specialized interpreter, but not simultaneous. No matter, with what languages
interpreter works, his main task is to avoid linguistic and cultural obstacles,
taking into consideration the differences of the juridical systems of different
countries. However there are such universals and interpretation is impossible
without them. There are some sibling connections in the juridical systems of
different countries, but every community trains to perfection some peculiar
ones. As the result, some universal scientific rules for translation were not
created and the specialized interpreter takes the responsibility to solve the
problems, which happen while interpreting the juridical text.
Legal experts
enrich the target language using analysis elements for solving the practical
problems. Thus, many authors study the vocabulary of French language and note
the coexistence of specialized words, juridical terms: antichrèse
(mortgaging contract) and common vocabulary: faute (guilt). They also
note that day-to-day use words, such as: taux (amount of tax) and plancher
(hard ground), which become specialized after confluence into the compound
word: taux-plancher (settled tax), enrich vocabulary and getting,
sometimes, figurative sense. Lowers figure out that accepted turns and
expressions are used, sometimes, in some literary forms and carry the same
meaning in legislative documents. However, there is no insuperable linguistic
and technical barrier in the interpreter system [3].
There are just
simple rules in French doctrine, which lead the translator to the adequate
interpretation: every time, when the special term may express the idea exactly,
it is used in translation, and vise versa, if the pronouncement clarity is
reached with the help of colloquial vocabulary, it becomes common.
These facts force
the scientists to investigate peculiarities of the juridical communication
profound. It is significant, that the interpreter of juridical documentation
has to realize the legal author's competence, as long as the discrepancy risk
between speaker intension and spoken speech is inevitable.
It is necessary to take into consideration the forms of statement choice. Philosophers and linguists of right differentiate greatly the language of legislator, judge and advocate, in spite of the fact that all of them use the same concepts and vocabulary. Many authors point out that the variableness of expression forms in law, reminds literature language diversity: there can be found both monologues and dialogues in the juridical texts. Evidently, those who fulfil translation of the juridical texts consciously use various methods of translation.
From lexical point the language of law sets
a number of difficult tasks before the translator. Nomenclature of law is
distinguished by its vague nature, which occurs, according Jean-Claude
Gémar, because of the indistinct nature of its concepts. Let us take as
an example the term droit (law).
Definitions of this term vary in different dictionaries. Meanwhile precisely
this term is the key one in the juridical field [4].
Law terminology is characterized
by its vast polisemy. This phenomenon appeared in the juridical language by
historical reasons, in the course of development of law at different epochs of
human history, in the course of appearance of social institutions and
personalities who furthered to its change and replenishment. Law reflects the
need of society in time, so meanings of the terms may vary according to
different epochs and contexts. Language of law, being social phenomenon, was
influenced by the remarkable events which occurred at definite period of
history.
Language of law is an ancient language
which inherited terminology from such languages as Latin and Greek. Latin
expressions and terms, for example, are essential part of law. The French
juridical language has borrowed the following words from Latin: constitution (constitution), législateur (legislator), régime (system), acte (act), adjudication (auction), hypothèque
(mortgage), cession (concession),
clause (clause) and etc.
Later other languages have enriched the
terminology of French law: from English
– budget (budget), chèque (cheque), comité (committee); from Italian
the terms of financial and trade spheres – aval
(commission), banque (bank), banqueroute (bankruptcy), bilan (balance), douane (customs); and finally from Greek language – démocratie (democracy), monarchie (monarchy), oligarchie (oligarchy), politique (politics), théocratie
(theocracy).
Also we should mention that words are
undergoing changes in their new context and that evolution can lead to the
changes of meaning with reference to the language – the source. For example,
Latin word statum is represented in
English as status, while in French
this term is represented as statut in
its simple form and as statu (without
t) in such expression as statu quo (status quo).
J.Darbelne distinguishes nomenclature and pare-technical dictionary. Those lexical units which belong to definite subject are called nomenclature. Pare-technical dictionary comprises limited-in- use and common words, which have technical meaning. For example, syndic (head of living quarters’ committee), défendeur (defendant), inculpé (the accused), accusé (the accused) [5].
A lot of scientists record that the meaning of words in the text won’t be comprehended if these lexical units are not conformed by themselves.
The style or the manner of judicial texts utterance take aim to transform information that will have more or less important effect but only if the chosen style conforms to the type of message. For an example, normative texts have the tone of pomposity. According to such text the State claims and only it prompts to follow some norms organizing the life of society.
A judicial language has some syntactical characteristics in order to distinguish it from languages of other selections. It follows to the same syntactical rules as daily language.
According to French judicial language a verb can be put as before as after a noun: est décrété bien public (public goods are defined by the decree); le conseil, statuant à l’unanimité, sur proposition…adopte…(the Council, is settled by unanimous decision, according to the preposition… adopts...). Passive voice is often used in the judicial language. The usage of passive constructions makes neutral tone, objective and formal, where the following purpose is to save “nobility” of normative text. So the pronoun il is more preferable rather than an indefinite pronoun on. In consequence of the phrase il est convenu/décidé is much more preferable than the phrase on a convenu/décidé.
In conclusion we have to mention that the judicial language is a wide field for thinking during the translation. First of all it illustrates fundamental aspects of the translation theory: a study of said information and its conformation of speaker’s intention, an existence of sense that is free of linguistic sign. Moreover a broad study of the judicial language as any specialized discipline contains the solution of problems with paraphrasing inside not only one and the same linguistic and technical system but also in transformation from one language system to another.
Literature:
1. Saussure, F. de Cours de linguistique générale, Paris 1982
2. Nida E. et Taber C. La traduction : théorie et méthode, Paris
3. Jaques Pelage « La traduction face au droit», E.S.I.T., Paris
4. Jean – Claude Gémar, « Les fondements du langage du droit comme langue de spécialité », Revue générale du droit, Université d’Ottawa, Faculté de Droit, vol. 21, no 4, 1990, p.719.
5. Jean Darbelnet, «Réflexions sur le discours juridique», Meta, vol. 24, no 1, mars 1979, p. 27.