Abstract
This paper will explore the implications in relation to the possibility of making law students comprehend foreign legal terminology. The starting point of our analysis, our hypothesis, will be that the law student is not necessarily equipped with foreign language skills. For this reason the author will attempt to demonstrate that comparative lawyers must familiarise their unfamiliarised (students of law) with familiar domestic[1] terminology where this is possible. If no such familiar concepts can be found, the comparative lawyer should attempt to proceed with ‘translating’ foreign legal concepts by the use of ‘close (functional) terminological equivalents’ in one’s domestic legal language (school of functionalism). If, on the other hand, no parallel legal devices for the foreign legal term are found in one’s domestic jurisdiction, the comparative lawyer should proceed by deploying a contextual approach in his analysis/teaching (school of contextualism). Above all, one is reminded that words are mere conventions. So too legal terms are mere conventions. As a result, it would be neglectful to not state that our students must be assisted in identifying the semainon (σημαίνον) and the semainomenon (σημαινόμενον), that is assisted in identifying the signified and the signifier, when they engage themselves with foreign legal terminology in their comparative law studies. Additionally, as Van Hoecke has argued, apparently disconnected notions, concepts or areas of law may well be relevant to each other (Van Hoecke 2004, 175). Yet, it would be perfectly ‘legitimate’ on certain occasions for one to compare prima facie connected terms such as ‘Interprétation – Interpretation or Construction – Auslegung’ respectively in French, English and German, since these terms are a perfectly valid comparative trio (all words basically refer to the same intellectual activity) (Platsas 2008, 6; quoting Van Hoecke, op. cit., n. 3). All in all, the paper will conclude that the comparative lawyer should be constantly reminded of the difficulties that his/her students might have when dealing with foreign legal terminology, because of one has it that even experienced comparative lawyers can face problems of comprehension when dealing with foreign legal terminology.
[1] Cf. Zweigert and Kötz 1998, 35; according to them the comparatist can only reach ideal results, if he ‘eradicates the preconceptions of his native legal system.’
Funding
The author wishes to thank another colleague of his
David Hodgkinson
for proofreading the work. The work has been conducted under the Teaching Informed by Research (TIR) Initiative of the University of Derby.
References
Primary Sources
Case Law
Davy v Leeds Corporation [1964] 3 All ER 390, [1964] 1 WLR 1218, 16 P&CR 244, 62 LGR 628, [1964] RVR 776, 128 JP 541.
Secondary Sources
Books
Akmajian, A., R.A. Demers, A.K. Farmer, and R.M. Harnish. 1990. An Introduction to Language and Communication. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Baskin, R. and de Saussure, F. 1960. Course in General Linguistics. London: Peter Owen.
Beaulac, S. 2004. The Power of Language in the Making of International Law. Leiden/Boston Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Crawford, J. 1979. The Creation of States in International Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Crystal, D. 2007. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crystal, D. 2009. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
David, R. 1980. English and French Law. London: Stevens.
Freeman, M.D.A. 2008. Lloyd‟s Introduction to Jurisprudence. London: Sweet & Maxwell – Thomson Reuters.
Glendon, A.M., Gordon, M.W. and Osakwe, C. 1994. Comparative Legal Traditions, St. Paul, Minn.: West Publishing.
Kahn-Freund, O. 1965. Comparative Law as an Academic Subject. Oxford: Oxford Clarendon Press.
Haigh, R. 2009. Legal English. Abingdon: Routledge-Cavendish.
Maharg, P. 2007. Transforming Legal Education. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.
Merryman, J.H. 1999. The Loneliness of the Comparative Lawyer. The Hague: Kluwer.
Örücü, E. 2004. The Enigma of Comparative Law. Leiden/Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Śarčević, S. 1997. New Approach to Legal Translation. The Hague/London/Boston: Kluwer Law International.
Wacks, R. 2009. Understanding Jurisprudence: An Introduction to Legal Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
Zweigert, K, and Kôtz, H. 1998. An Introduction to Comparative Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chapters or other parts of a book
Beaudoin, L. 2009. Legal Translation in Canada: the Genius of Legal Language(s). In Translation Issues in Language and Law, eds. Olsen, F., Lorz, A., and Stein, D., 136-144. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Brand, O. 2009. Language as a Barrier to Comparative Law. In Translation Issues in Language and Law, eds. Olsen, F., Lorz, A., and Stein, D., 18-34. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
de Groot, G.R. 2009. Legal Translation. In Elgar Encyclopedia of Comparative Law, ed. Smits, J., 423-433. Cheltenham: EE Publishing.
Doczekalska, A. 2009. Drafting or Translation – Production of Multilingual Legal Texts. In Translation Issues in Language and Law, eds. Olsen, F., Lorz, A., and Stein, D., 116-135. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Grosswald Curran, V. 2008. Comparative Law and Language. In The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law, eds. Reimann, M., and Zimmermann R., 675-707. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kischel, U. 2009. Legal Cultures – Legal Languages. In Translation Issues in Language and Law, eds. Olsen, F., Lorz, A., and Stein, D., 7-17. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kôtz, H. 2003. The Trento Project and its Contribution to the Europeanization of Private Law. In The Common Core of European Private Law, eds. Bussani, M., and Mattei, U., 209-219. The Hague/London/New York: Kluwer Law International.
Lambert, J. 2009. The Status and Position of Legal Translation: a Chapter in the Discursive Construction of Societies. In Translation Issues in Language and Law, eds. Olsen, F., Lorz, A., and Stein, D., 76-95. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lazareff, S. 1999. International Arbitration: towards a Common Procedural Approach. In Conflicting Legal Cultures in Commercial Arbitration: Old Issues and New Trends, eds. Frommel, S., and Rider, B., 31-38. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.
Gotti, M. 2009. Translation Issues in Language and Law. In Translation Issues in Language and Law, eds. Olsen, F., Lorz, A., and Stein, D., 55-75. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
McAuliffe, K. 2009. Translation at the Court of Justice of the European Communities. In Translation Issues in Language and Law, eds. Olsen, F., Lorz, A., and Stein, D., 99-115. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Pound, R. 1954. Some Thoughts about Comparative Law. In Festscrift für Ernst Rabel ed. Dolle, H. Tübingen: Mohr.
Sacco, R. 1994. La traduzione giuridica. In Il linguaggio del diritto, eds. Scarpelli, U., and Di Lucia, P., 475-490. Milan: Edizioni Universitarie di Lettere, Economia e Diritto.
Schäffner, C. 1998. Parallel Texts in Translation. In L Bowker (ed), Unity or Diversity? Current Trends in Translation Studies, ed. Bowker, L., 83-90. Manchester: Saint Jerome Publishing.
Stein, D. 2009. Introduction: Forensic Translation – Practical Issues and their Theoretical Underpinnings. In Translation Issues in Language and Law, eds. Olsen, F., Lorz, A., and Stein, D., 1-4. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Triebel, V. 2009. Pitfalls of English as a Contract Language. In Translation Issues in Language and Law, eds. Olsen, F., Lorz, A., and Stein, D., 147-181. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Trosborg, A. 1997. Translating Hybrid Political Texts. In Text Typology and Translation, ed. Trosborg, A., 145-158. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Van Hoecke, M. 2004. Deep Level Comparative Law. In Epistemology and Methodology of Comparative Law, ed. Van Hoecke, M., 165-196. Oxford and Portland Oregon: Hart Publishing.
Wallow, A. 2006. Herausforderung zu begrifflichen Reflexion: Recht und Sprache aus der Sicht des Rechtsvergleichers. In Law and Language – Recht und Sprache, eds. Lundmark, T., and Wallow, A., 3-13. Berlin/Hamburg/Münster: LIT.
Translated works
Anscombe, G.E.M., trans. 1968. Philosophical Investigations of Wittgenstein. Oxford, Basil Blackwell.
Journal Articles
Bilder, R.B. 1994. Perspectives on Sovereignty in the Current Context: An American Viewpoint. Canada-United States Law Journal 20: 9-17.
Grosswald Curran, V. 1998. Cultural Immersion, Difference and Categories in U.S. Comparative Law. American Journal of Comparative Law 46: 43-92.
Legrand, P. 2000-2001. The Return of the Repressed: Moving Comparative Studies Beyond Pleasure. Tulane Law Review 75: 1033-1052.
Articles in online journals
Platsas, A.E. 2008. The Functional and the Dysfunctional in the Comparative Method of Law: Some Critical Remarks. 12(3) Electronic Journal of Comparative Law 6 (December), http://www.ejcl.org/123/art123-3.pdf (accessed June 3, 2009).
Miscellaneous
Nicholas, B. 1993. The United Kingdom and the Vienna Sales Convention: Another Case of Splendid Isolation?. Centre of Comparative and Foreign Law Studies, University of Rome I (March). http://servizi.iit.cnr.it/~crdcs/crdcs/frames9.htm
(accessed June 3, 2009).
License
When submitting a paper the author agrees to the following publishing agreement and processing personal data.
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT, COPYRIGHT LICENSE, PERSONAL DATA PROCESSING CONSENT
This is a publication agreement and copyright license (“Agreement”) regarding a written manuscript currently submitted via Pressto platform
(“Article”) to be published in Comparative Legilinguistics International Journal for Legal Communication (“Journal”).
The parties to this Agreement are:
the Author or Authors of the submitted article (individually, or if more than one author, collectively, “Author”) and Comparative Legilinguistics International Journal for Legal Communication (“Publisher”), address al. Niepodległości 4, 61-874 Poznań, represented by its editor in chief Aleksandra Matulewska.
§1. LICENSE OF COPYRIGHT
a) The Author and the Publisher agree that the Author grants a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which is incorporated herein by reference and is further specified at Creative Commons — Attribution 4.0 International — CC BY 4.0 copyright license in the Article to the general public.
b) The Author grants to the Publisher a royalty-free, worldwide nonexclusive license to publish, reproduce, display, distribute, translate and use the Article in any form, either separately or as part of a collective work, including but not limited to a nonexclusive license to publish the Article in an issue of the Journal, copy and distribute individual reprints of the Article, authorize reproduction of the entire Article in another publication, and authorize reproduction and distribution of the Article or an abstract thereof by means of computerized retrieval systems (such as Westlaw, Lexis and SSRN). The Author retains ownership of all rights under copyright in the Article, and all rights not expressly granted in this Agreement.
c) The Author grants to the Publisher the power to assign, sublicense or otherwise transfer any and all licenses expressly granted to the Publisher under this Agreement.
d) Republication. The Author agrees to require that the Publisher be given credit as the original publisher in any republication of the Article authorized by the Author. If the Publisher authorizes any other party to republish the Article under the terms of paragraphs 1c and 1 of this Agreement, the Publisher shall require such party to ensure that the Author is credited as the Author.
§2. EDITING OF THE ARTICLE
a) The Author agrees that the Publisher may edit the Article as suitable for publication in the Journal. To the extent that the Publisher’s edits amount to copyrightable works of authorship, the Publisher hereby assigns all right, title, and interest in such edits to the Author.
§3. WARRANTIES
a) The Author represents and warrants that to the best of the Author’s knowledge the Article does not defame any person, does not invade the privacy of any person, and does not in any other manner infringe upon the rights of any person. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Publisher against all such claims.
b) The Author represents and warrants that the Author has full power and authority to enter into this Agreement and to grant the licenses granted in this Agreement.
c) The Author represents and warrants that the Article furnished to the Publisher has not been published previously. For purposes of this paragraph, making a copy of the Article accessible over the Internet, including, but not limited to, posting the Article to a database accessible over the Internet, does not constitute prior publication so long as the as such copy indicates that the Article is not in final form, such as by designating such copy to be a “draft,” a “working paper,” or “work-in-progress”. The Author agrees to hold harmless the Publisher, its licensees and distributees, from any claim, action, or proceeding alleging facts that constitute a breach of any warranty enumerated in this paragraph.
§4. TERM
a) The agreement was concluded for an unspecified time.
§5. PAYMENT
a) The Author agrees and acknowledges that the Author will receive no payment from the Publisher for use of the Article or the licenses granted in this Agreement.
b) The Publisher agrees and acknowledges that the Publisher will not receive any payment from the Author for publication by the Publisher.
§6. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
a) This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the Author and the Publisher with respect to the subject of this Agreement. This Agreement contains all of the warranties and agreements between the parties with respect to the Article, and each party acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements have been made by or on behalf of any party except those warranties and agreements embodied in this Agreement.
b) In all cases not regulated by this Agreement, legal provisions of Polish Copyright Act and Polish Civil Code shall apply.
c) Any disputes arising from the enforcement of obligations connected with this Agreement shall be resolved by a court competent for the headquarters of the Publisher.
d) Any amendments or additions to the Agreement must be made in writing and signed by authorised representative of both parties, otherwise being ineffective.
e) This Agreement is signed electronically and the submission of the article via the PRESSto platform is considered as the conclusion of the Agreement by the Author and the Publisher.
f) Clause for consent to the processing of personal data - general
g) The Author shall give his or her consent to the processing of their personal data in accordance with the Act of 10 May 2018 on the protection of personal data and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of persons physical in connection with the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46 / EC (General Data Protection Regulation) for the purpose and in connection with making publications available on the PRESSto scientific journals platform and DeGruyter platform, guaranteeing the security of services rendered, and improving them.
I HAVE READ AND AGREE FULLY WITH THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT.
The Author The Publisher