Main Article Content



Building on previous holistic multicomponent paradigms of translation macrocompetence, a legal translation competence model is presented which avoids certain conceptual duplications in the light of professional practice, and incorporates distinctive legal thematic elements. Beyond component description, it is argued that the integral development of legal translation competence requires specific interdisciplinary methodologies for practical problem solving. The integrative approach proposed in this paper is process-oriented, and focuses on the legal translation-specific know-how within the key methodological or strategic subcompetence controlling all other subcompetences. Translation and legal knowledge are inextricably linked throughout the translation process, from the initial skopos analysis and legal macro-contextualization until the final revision stage. This approach, intended as a meta-reflection continuum between competence acquisition and reinforcement, and between formal training and professional practice, has proved effective for the systematization of problem-identification, problem-categorization and problem-solving patterns. Finally, some implications for legal translation training are outlined by way of conclusion.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite


  1. Alves, Fabio. 2005. Bridging the Gap Between Declarative and Procedural Knowledge in the Training of Translators: Meta-Reflection Under Scrutiny. Meta 50(4) [article only available in electronic form].
  2. Bestué Salinas, Carmen. 2008. El método comparativo en la traducción de textos jurídicos. Úsese con precaución. Sendebar 19: 199-212.
  3. Biel, Łucja. 2009. Organisation of background knowledge structures in legal language and related translation problems. Comparative Legilinguistics 1: 176-189.
  4. De Groot, Gérard-René. 2006. Legal Translation. In: Jan M. Smits. Elgar Encyclopedia of Comparative Law. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 423-433.
  5. Delisle, Jean. 1992. Les manuels de traduction: essai de classification. TTR (traduction, terminologie, rédaction) 5(1): 17-47.
  6. EMT Expert Group. 2009. Competences for professional translators, experts in multilingual and multimedia communication. Brussels: European Commission.
  7. Ferran Larraz, Elena. 2009. La institución desconocida y la intraducibilidad. Paralelismo entre el derecho comparado y la traducción jurídica frente a la intraducibilidad. Meta 54(2): 295-308.
  8. Gile, Daniel. 1995. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  9. Hage, Jaap C. 1997. Reasoning with Rules. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  10. Hurtado Albir, Amparo (dir.). 1999. Enseñar a traducir: metodología en la formación de traductores e intérpretes. Madrid: Edelsa.
  11. Hurtado Albir, Amparo. 2007. Competence-based Curriculum Design for Training Translators. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 1(2): 163-195.
  12. Kaiser-Cooke, Michèle. 1994. Translatorial expertise – a cross-cultural phenomenon from an inter-disciplinary perspective. In: Mary Snell-Hornby, Franz Pöchhacker and Klaus Kaindl (eds.). Translation Studies. An Interdiscipline. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 135-139.
  13. Kelly, Dorothy. 2002. Un modelo de competencia traductora: Bases para el diseño curricular. Puentes 1: 9-20.
  14. Kiraly, Donald. 1995. Pathways to Translation. Pedagogy and Process. Kent, Ohio: Kent State University Press.
  15. Mattila, Heikki E. S. 2006. Comparative Legal Linguistics. Aldershot: Ashgate.
  16. Mayoral Asensio, Roberto. 2005. ¿Cuánto Derecho debe saber el traductor jurídico? In: Esther Monzó and Anabel Borja (eds.). La traducción y la interpretación en las relaciones jurídicas internacionales. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I, 107-112.
  17. Neubert, Albrecht. 1994. Competence in translation: a complex skill, how to study and how to teach it. In: Mary Snell-Hornby, Franz Pöchhacker and Klaus Kaindl (eds.). Translation Studies. An Interdiscipline. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 411-420.
  18. Neubert, Albrecht. 2000. Competence in language, in languages, and in translation. In: Christina Schäffner and Beverly Adab (eds.). Developing Translation Competence. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 3-18.
  19. Nord, Christiane. 1991. Text Analysis in Translation. Theory, Methodology, and Didactic Application of a Model for Translation-Oriented Text Analysis. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
  20. PACTE. 2000. Acquiring translation competence: hypotheses and methodological problems of a research project. In: Allison Beeby, Doris Ensinger and Marisa Presas (eds.). Investigating Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 99-106.
  21. PACTE. 2003. Building a Translation Competence Model. In: Fabio Alves (ed.). Triangulating Translation: Perspectives in Process Oriented Research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 43-66.
  22. PACTE. 2005. Investigating Translation Competence: Conceptual and Methodological Issues. Meta 50(2): 609-619.
  23. Prieto Ramos, Fernando. 2009. Interdisciplinariedad y ubicación macrotextual en traducción jurídica. Translation Journal 13(4).
  24. Prieto Ramos, Fernando. 2011. El traductor como redactor de instrumentos jurídicos: el caso de los tratados internacionales. Journal of Specialised Translation 15 (forthcoming).
  25. Pym, Anthony. 2003. Redefining Translation Competence in an Electronic Age. In Defence of a Minimalist Approach. Meta 48(4): 481-487.
  26. Rayer, Louise. 1991. The Limburg Combined Course for Lawyers and Translators. In: Catriona Picken (ed.). ITI Conference 5: Windows on the World: Proceedings. London: ASLIB, 12-23.
  27. Šarčević, Susan. 1997. New Approach to Legal Translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.
  28. Schäffner, Christina. 2000. Running before Walking? Designing a Translation Programme at Undergraduate Level. In: Christina Schäffner and Beverly Adab (eds.). Developing Translation Competence. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 143-156.
  29. Way, Catherine. 2002. Traducción y Derecho: iniciativas para desarrollar la colaboración interdisciplinar. Puentes 2: 15-26.
  30. Wilss, Wolfram. 1976. Perspectives and limitations of a didactic framework for the teaching of translation. In: Richard Brislin (ed.). Translation Applications and Research. New York: Gardner, 117-137.