How to Cite

GRZYBEK, J. (2009). POLYSEMY, HOMONYMY AND OTHER SOURCES OF AMBIGUITY IN THE LANGUAGE OF CHINESE CONTRACTS. Comparative Legilinguistics, 1, 207–215. https://doi.org/10.14746/cl.2009.01.15


Th is paper discusses the main sources of ambiguity in Chinese-Polish
translation of the contract legal language. Legal Chinese is very often the same as ordinary formal Chinese and that fact causes ambiguity in Chinese contracts. Th e author focuses on polysemy and homonymy which make the interpretation of legal language diffi cult and ambiguous. The meaning of Chinese characters depends on the textual context. However, when an interpreter does not know the background information of translated legal texts, it is very diffi cult to achieve a high quality legal translation. The abundance of homophones in Chinese language also poses a problem, especially in the case of contracts concluded in words, not in writing. The paper further presents different grammatical functions of Chinese terms encountered in contracts without a morphological change. Such linguistic features of Chinese language as: the absence of distinction between singular and plural nouns, lack of infl ection, no grammatical categories of tense and
aspect cause ambiguity and vagueness in interpreting the Chinese agreements. Moreover, the understanding of such texts is sometimes incorrect due to omissions and elliptical sentences.
The author also shows the diff erences in the meaning of terms, which apparently signify the same entities and concepts in Polish and Chinese legal languages but in fact diff er signifi cantly.


Black’s Law Dictionary. 2004. Eighth Edition. Garner Brayan A. (ed.). United States of America: Thomson West.

Cao, D. 2004. Chinese law: a language perspective, Hants: Ashgate.

Comparative Analysis on the Chinese Contrect Law. 2003. Gebhardt I., Zhang Yuqing, Schröder R. (eds.), Berliner Wissenschafts-verlag。

Creifeld, C. Weber, K. 2004. Rechtswörterbuch. München: Verlag C.H. Beck.

Fairbank, J. K. 2003. Historia Chin. Nowe spojrzenie. Warszawa – Gdańsk: Dom Wydawniczy Marabut.

法律辞典。2003。 中国社会科学院法学研究所, 法律辞典编委会编,


Hsu, C. S. (Ed.) Understanding China’s Legal System. Essays in Honour of Jerome A. Cohen. New York: New York University Press.

Kierzkowska, D. 2002. Tłumaczenie prawnicze. Warsaw: TEPIS Publishing House.

Köbler, G. 2002. Rechtschinesisch. Deutsch-chinesisches und chinesisch-deutsches Rechtswoerterbuch für jedermann. München: Verlag Franz Vahlen Muenchen.

Menski, W. 2006. Comparative law in a global context: The legal systems of Asia and Africa. New York: Cambridge University Press, 3-4, 23, 493.

Ping Shi, 2005. Die Prinzipien des chinesischen Vertragsrechts。Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Europäischer Verlag der Wissenschaften

Poznański, J. (red.). 1998. Dokumenty polskie. Wybór dla tłumaczy sądowych. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo TEPIS.

Sandrini, P. 1996. Terminologiearbeit im Recht. Vienna: Internat. Network for Terminology.

Šarčević, Susan. 2000. New Approach to Legal Translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.

Senger von, H. 1994. Einführung in das chinesische Recht, München: Verlag C.H. Beck.

Tokarczyk, R. 2005. Współczesne kultury prawne. Kraków: Kantor Wydawniczy Zakamycze.

Tomaszczyk, J. (red.), 1999. Aspects of legal language and legal translation. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.

Wegmann, K., Kittlaus, M. (Ed.) Rechtsdenken. Schnittpunkte West und Ost. Recht in den gesellschafts- und staatstragenden Institutionen Europas und Chinas. Münster : Lit Verlag, pp: 78-97.

Vermeer H.J. 1996. A skopos theory of translation: (some arguments for and against). Textcon Text Verlag. Heidelberg.




Zimmerman J.M. 1999. China Law Deskbook. A Legal Guide for Foreign-Invested Enterprises, Chicago: American Bar Association, Section on International Law and Practice.