TRANSLATION IN LIBEL CASES: REPUTATIONS AT STAKE!

Main Article Content

Juliette Scott
John Anthony O'Shea

Abstract

Abstract: In this paper we examine translation arising in court cases involving reputational damage. A diachronic and tightly focused cross-jurisdictional selection of examples from case law is used to highlight the range of ways in which translation can be employed, blamed, or relied upon by the parties and by the courts, and we glimpse how translations can be a source of libel, a defence against libel, or a gateway to libellous material, how crucial translation can be in protecting or damaging reputations, and how significantly it can affect a case’s outcome. We apply Engberg’s lens for communication in legal contexts, distinguishing micro, meso and macro occurrences of translation at publisher/business/individual, judicial, and State levels. Recurring translation-related topics either mooted by courts or arising in our analysis are then outlined, including: competing translations; translation techniques; translator identification; online translation; how the acceptance of jurisdiction may be influenced by translation requirements; and how judges approach decision-making when foreign language documents and translation are involved.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Scott, J., & O’Shea, J. A. (2022). TRANSLATION IN LIBEL CASES: REPUTATIONS AT STAKE!. Comparative Legilinguistics, 50, 123-179. https://doi.org/10.14746/cl.50.2022.7
Section
Articles

References

  1. Armano, Antonio. 2014. Maledizioni. Processi, sequestri, censure a scrittori e editori in Italia dal dopoguerra a oggi, anzi a domani. Milano: Rizzoli.
  2. Baaij, Cornelius, J. W. 2012. Fifty Years of Multilingual Interpretation in the European Union. In Oxford Handbook of Language and Law, eds. Peter M. Tiersma and Lawrence M. Solan, 217–231. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  3. Baker, Mona. 1992. In other words. London: Routledge.
  4. Baker, Mona. 1999. The role of corpora in investigating the linguistic behaviour of professional translators. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4: 281–298.
  5. Bassnett, Susan. 2002. Translation Studies. London: Routledge.
  6. Bhatia, Vijay K. 2017. Critical discourse analysis. London: Routledge.
  7. Blake, Matthew. 2015. Man vs. machine: Google Translate jeopardizes client confidentiality, ediscovery. Above the Law (January 5). http://abovethelaw.com/2015/0l/man-vs-machine-google-translate-jeopardizes-client-confidentiality-ediscovery (accessed May 30, 2022).
  8. Bowdler, Thomas. Ed. 1818. The Family Shakespeare. In Ten Volumes 12mo. In which nothing is added to the Text; but those Words and Expressions are omitted which cannot with Propriety be read aloud in a Family. London: Longman.
  9. Breeze, Ruth. 2020. Angry tweets: A corpus-assisted study of anger in populist political discourse. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 8 (1): 118–145.
  10. Burke, Peter. Ed. 2007. Cultural Translation in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  11. Cao, Deborah. 2007. Translating law. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
  12. Carney, Terence. 2016. Using frames to determine ordinary meaning in court cases: the case of “plant” and “vermin”. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics 45: 31–48.
  13. Calhoun, John. 2014. Measuring the Fortress: Explaining Trends in Supreme Court and Circuit Court Dictionary Use. The Yale Law Journal 124: 484–526.
  14. Catford, John C. 1965. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  15. Cicero, Marcus T. (46 BCE/1960 CE) ‘De optimo genere oratorum’. In Cicero De inventione, De optimo genere oratorum, topica, transl. by H. M. Hubbell, 347–373. Cambridge, MA: Harvard; London: Heinemann.
  16. Christ, Ronald. 1980. The Making of a Translator: An Interview with Helen R. Lane. Translation Review 5(1): 6–18.
  17. COPFS (Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service) 2022. Guidance booklet for expert witnesses. Edinburgh: COPFS.
  18. Coulthard, Malcolm. 2005. The Linguist as Expert Witness. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 1 (1): 39–58.
  19. Coulthard, Malcolm. 2020. Experts and opinions. In The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics, eds. Malcolm Coulthard, Alison May and Rui Sousa-Silva, 473–486. London: Routledge.
  20. Davie, Mark. 2012. Traduttore traditore. Oxford University Press blog. https://blog.oup.com/2012/09/traduttore-traditore-translator-traitor-translation/ (accessed May 30, 2022).
  21. Eliot, Lance B. 2021. Considerations About Legal Jargon and the Use Thereof by AI (Stanford Center for Legal Informatics), http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3989332 (accessed May 30, 2022).
  22. Emerich, Yaëll. 2017. Concepts and Words: A Transsystemic Approach to the Study of Law between Law and Language. Revue juridique Thémis de l’Université de Montréal 51: 591–624.
  23. Engberg, Jan. 2002. Legal Meaning Assumptions – What are the Consequences for Legal Interpretation and Legal Translation? International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 15: 375–388.
  24. Engberg, Jan. 2015. LSP studies as a quest for meso-level regularities. In Languages for special purposes in a multilingual, transcultural world, proceedings of the 19th European symposium on languages for special purposes, keynote addresses, 8–10 July 2013, Vienna, Austria, eds. Gerhard Budin and Vesna Lušicky, 14–25. Vienna: University of Vienna.
  25. Fernández, Fruela. 2020. The ‘Einaudi libel’: A battle of translations in the Cold War. TRANSlation & INTerpreting 12 (2): 7–18.
  26. Ferrari, Chiara. 2013. Cantacronache 1958-1962. Politica e protesta in musica. Storicamente 9 (42): 3–39.
  27. French, Robert. 2015. One Justice – Many Voices. Paper presented at the Language and the Law Conference, 29 August, in Darwin, Australia.
  28. Gémar, Jean-Claude. 2014. Catching the spirit of the law: from translation to co-drafting. In Comparative Law – Engaging Translation, ed. Simone Glanert, 67–86. London: Routledge.
  29. Gémar, Jean-Claude. 2016a. De la lettre à l’esprit. L’épopée de la jurilinguistique canadienne. Revue de droit de l’Université de Sherbrooke 46 (2): 391–450.
  30. Gémar, Jean-Claude. 2016b. Langages du droit et styles en traduction : Common Law vs. Droit civil : An Odd Couple ? Journal of Civil Law Studies 9: 135–165.
  31. Gibbs, Joseph. 2018. ‘A certain false, malicious, scandalous and famous libel’: Sir Henry Morgan’s legal action against a London publisher of Alexandre Exquemelin, 1685. International Journal of Maritime History 30 (1): 3–29.
  32. Gilbert, David and Georgina Heydon. 2021. Translated Transcripts From Covert Recordings Used for Evidence in Court: Issues of Reliability. Frontiers in Communication 6: 1–13.
  33. Greenberg, Daniel, ed. 2019. Jowitt’s Dictionary of English Law (5th ed.). London: Sweet & Maxwell.
  34. Guillén-Nieto, Victoria. 2011. The Linguist as Expert Witness in The Community Trademark Courts. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 162 (1): 63–83.
  35. Guillén-Nieto, Victoria. 2020. Defamation as a Language Crime. JLL 9: 1–22.
  36. Hammond, Matt. 1995. A new wind of quality from Europe: Implications of the court case cited by Holz-Manttari for the U.S. translation industry. In Translation and the law, ed. Marshall Morris, 233–245. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  37. Hartley, Trevor C. 2009. International Commercial Litigation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  38. Harvey, Malcolm. 2002. What’s so Special about Legal Translation? Meta 47 (2): 177–185.
  39. Ives, George B., trans. 1925. The Essays of Montaigne, Volume II. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
  40. Kasirer, Nicholas. 2000. François Gény’s libre recherche scientifique as a Guide for Legal Translation. Louisiana Law Review 61 (2): 3331–3352.
  41. Kimble, Joseph. 2022 (in press). Dictionary Diving in the Courts: A Shaky Grab for Ordinary Meaning. Journal of Appellate Practice and Process.
  42. Kotarska, Anna, and Wojciech Wołoszyk. 2021. Language technologies in law firm practice and the challenges resulting therefrom. https://tlumaczenia-prawnicze.eu/language-technologies-in-law-firm-practice-and-the-challenges-resulting-therefrom/ (accessed May 30, 2022).
  43. Lamalle, Sandy. 2017. Navigation jurilinguistique. Revue de droit de l’Université de Sherbrooke 47 (2-3): 343–363.
  44. Larkin, Jack. 2019. False havens: assessing new developments in the libel tourism debate. Journal of Media Law 11 (1): 82–108.
  45. Liberovici, Sergio and Straniero, Michele L. 1962. Canti della nuova resistenza spagnola: 1939-1961. Turin: Einaudi.
  46. Liu, Sida, and Di Wang. 2021. Censorship. In The Routledge Handbook of Law and Society, eds. Mariana Valverde, Kamari Clarke, Eve Darian-Smith and Prabha Kotiswaran, 86–89. London: Routledge.
  47. March, John. 1674. Actions for Slaunder and Arbitrements. London.
  48. Mattila, Heikki. E. S. 2006. Comparative Legal Linguistics (C. Goddard, trans.). Aldershot: Ashgate.
  49. Matulewska, Aleksandra. 2013. Legilinguistic Translatology. Bern: Peter Lang.
  50. McCalman, Ian. 1984. Unrespectable Radicalism: Infidels and Pornography in Early Nineteenth-Century London. Past & Present 104: 74–110.
  51. McMorran, Will. 2016. Sade in English (1831-1966). A brief history of Sade in English translation. Paper presented at 2016 American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies Conference (ASECS), March 30 – April 2, in Pittsburgh, USA.
  52. McMorran, Will. 2017. The Marquis de Sade in English, 1800-1850. The Modern Language Review 112 (3): 549–566.
  53. Mendes, Peter. 1993. Clandestine Erotic Fiction in English 1800-1930: A Bibliographical Study. London: Routledge.
  54. Monjean-Decaudin, Sylvie. 2012. La traduction du droit dans la procédure judiciaire. Paris: Dalloz.
  55. Moukheiber, Georges. 2015. L’interprète-traducteur en justice en France : est-il un expert à part entière ? Paper presented during the General Assembly of the European Expertise & Expert Institute, May 30, in Rome, Italy.
  56. Munday, Jeremy. 1998. A computer-assisted approach to the analysis of translation shifts. Meta 43 (4): 542–556.
  57. Newmark, Peter. 1988. A Textbook of Translation. London: Prentice Hall.
  58. Pontrandolfo, Gianluca. 2021. The fuzzy line between media and judicial discourse: insights from the Pinto-López Madrid case. In Social Media in Legal Practice, eds. Vijay K. Bhatia and Girolamo Tessuto, 47–62. London: Routledge.
  59. Rossolillo, Francesco. 1961. L’oltraggio, il vilipendio e la libertà politica. Il Federalista 5: 199, https://www.thefederalist.eu/site/index.php/it/saggi/1310-loltraggio-il-vilipendio-e-la-liberta-politica (accessed May 30, 2022).
  60. Šarčevic, Susan. 2000. Legal translation and translation theory: A receiver-oriented approach. Paper presented at Legal Translation, History, Theory/ies and Practice Conference, February 17–19, in Geneva, Switzerland.
  61. Scalia, Antonin, and Bryan A. Garner. 2012. Reading law: The interpretation of legal texts. St. Paul: Thomson/West.
  62. Schneider, Wendie E. 2001. Past Imperfect. The Yale Law Journal 110 (8): 1531–1545.
  63. Scott, Juliette. 2018. Specifying Levels of (C)overtness in Legal Translation Briefs. In Legal translation (studies) as a challenge / Herausforderungen an das Rechtsübersetzen, eds. Ingrid Simmonaes and Marita Kristiansen, 243–262. Berlin: Frank & Timme.
  64. Scott, Juliette. 2019. Legal translation outsourced. Oxford: University Press.
  65. Scott, Juliette, and John O’Shea. 2021a. How Legal Documents Translated Outside Institutions Affect Lives, Businesses and the Economy. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 34: 1331–1373. DOI: doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09815-5.
  66. Scott, Juliette, and John O’Shea. 2021b (in press). Impacts and repercussions of legal translation in medical settings. Proceedings of the 6th CRILL International Conference University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli: Cutting Through Medicine, Law and Other Disciplines: Interdisciplinary Challenges and Opportunities, May 20–22, in Naples, Italy.
  67. Scott, Juliette, and John O’Shea. 2021c, December 7. (Legal) translation as a far-reaching business risk. Paper presented at 4th International Conference on Economic, Business, Financial and Institutional Translation (ICEBFIT), December 6–7, in Cairo, Egypt.
  68. Shuy, Roger W. 2010. The language of defamation cases. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  69. Solan, Lawrence M. 1993. When Judges Use the Dictionary. American Speech 68 (1): 50–57.
  70. Solan, Lawrence M. 1998. Linguistic experts as semantic tour guides. Forensic Linguistics 5 (ii): 87–106.
  71. Solan, Lawrence M. 2012. Linguistic Issues in Statutory Interpretation. In Oxford Handbook of Language and Law, eds. Peter M. Tiersma and Lawrence M. Solan, 87–99. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  72. Solan, Lawrence M. 2020. Corpus Linguistics as a Method of Legal Interpretation: Some Progress, Some Questions. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 33: 283–298.
  73. Somssich, Réka, (ed.) 2012. Studies on translation and multilingualism: Language and translation in international law and EU law. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
  74. Strandvik, Ingemar. 2014. Is there Scope for A More Professional Approach to EU Multilingual Lawmaking? The Theory and Practice of Legislation 2 (2): 211–228.
  75. Tiersma, Peter, and Lawrence M. Solan 2002. The Linguist on the Witness Stand: Forensic Linguistics in American Courts. Language 78 (2): 221–239.
  76. Venuti, Lawrence. 1995. The translator’s invisibility: A history of translation. London: Routledge.
  77. Wahler, Madison E. 2018. A word is worth a thousand words: Legal implications of relying on machine translation technology. Stetson L. Review 48: 109–139.
  78. Wirtén, Eva H. 2020. Globalization. In The Oxford Illustrated History of the Book, ed. James Raven, 348–368. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  79. Wołoszyk, Wojciech. 2021. LSP’s responsibility for the process of and the rules of using machine translation, https://tlumaczenia-prawnicze.eu/lsps-responsibility-for-the-process-of-translation-and-the-rules-of-using-machine-translation/ (accessed May 30, 2022).
  80. Zampieri, Marcos, and Binyam Gebrekidan Gebre. 2012. Automatic Identification of Language Varieties: The Case of Portuguese. In Empirical Methods in Natural Languiage Processing. Proceedings of the Conference of Natural Language Processing 2012, ed. Jeremy Jancsary, 233–237. Wien: ÖGAI.