LEXICAL AND SYNTAX FEATURES OF ENGLISH AND ARABIC LEGAL DISCOURSE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

Main Article Content

Hanem EL-FARAHATY

Abstract

This paper discusses the common lexical and grammatical features of legal discourse inEnglish and Arabic.6 The rationale behind this analysis is to compare and contrast the discourse ofboth languages, list the similarities and differences between them and come up with the mostproblematic areas in legal translation. It is worth mentioning that features of Arabic legal discoursehave not been researched before, thus, I have taken the features of legal English as headlightsaccording to which I will analyze the corpus of Arabic legal documents. These features, however,are not specific to one particular type of written language of the law. By type of language is meantthe different types of legal texts such as legislations, contracts, official documents, courtproceedings, etc. For this purpose, authentic samples of different English and Arabic legaldocuments have been consulted. These texts, obtained from law professionals, include private legaldocuments such as tenancy agreements, employment contracts, correspondences between solicitorsand clients, reports to the court, birth certificates, and marriage certificates. Other documentsinclude selected legislative and international documents. To this effect, the United Nations (UN)website, other translation books such as Mansoor (1965), Hatim, Shunnaq and Buckley (1995) areconsulted.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
EL-FARAHATY, H. (2010). LEXICAL AND SYNTAX FEATURES OF ENGLISH AND ARABIC LEGAL DISCOURSE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY. Comparative Legilinguistics, 4, 61-80. https://doi.org/10.14746/cl.2010.4.6
Section
Articles

References

  1. Abdul-Raof, Hussein. 2000. Arabic Stylistics: A Course Book. Wiesbaden: Harraso Witz.
  2. Alcaraz, varó, Enrique and Brian, Hughes. 2002. Translation Practices Explained, LegalTranslation Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.
  3. Alexy, Robert. 1989. A Theory of Legal Argumentation: The Theory of RationalDiscourse as Theory of Legal Justification. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  4. Al-Qinai, Jamal. 1999. Explication vs. Implication in English-Arabic Translation.Theoretical Linguistics 25: 235-255.
  5. Asensio, M. Roberto. 2003. Translating Official Documents. Manchester: St Jerome.
  6. Badawi, Elsaid, Carter, M.G and Gully, Adrian. 2004. Modern Written Arabic: AComprehensive Grammar, London/New York: Routledge.
  7. Baker, Mona. 1992. In Other Words. London/New York: Routledge.
  8. Cao, Deborah. 2007. Translating Law. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
  9. Charrow, V.R. and Crandall, J. 1978. Legal Language: What is it and What can do weabout it?. The American Dialect Society Conference/Georgetown NWAVEConference, Washington, D.C.
  10. Charrow, V.R. et al. 1982. ―Characteristics and Functions of Legal Language‖. InSublanguage: Studies of Language in Restricted Semantic Domain, ed.Kittredge, Richard and John Lehrberger, 175-189. Berlin/New York: Walter deGrayter.
  11. Charrow, R.P. and Charrow, V.R. 1979a. Comprehension of Standard Jury Instructions:A Psycologistic Approach. Columbia Law Review 79._____1979b. Making Legal Language Understandable: A Psycholinguistic of the JuryInstructions. Columbia Law Review 79.
  12. Conley et al. 1978. The Power of Language: Presentational Style in the Courtroom. DukeLaw Journal 78: 1375-99.
  13. Conley, John M. and William M.O‘Barr. 1998. Just Words: Law, Language and Power.Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  14. Coulthard, Malcolm. and Johnson, Alison. 2007. An Introduction to Forensic Linguistics:Language in Evidence. London: Routledge.
  15. Crystal, D. and Davy, D. 1969. Investigating English Style. London: Longman.
  16. Danet, B. 1976. Language and the Construction of Reality in the Courtroom. Working Papers. Boston University._____. 1980. Language in the Legal Process. Law and Society Review 14, no. 3: 447-564._____1985. ‗Legal Discourse‘. In Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ed. T.A. van Dijk,273-291. London: Academic Press.
  17. Ebeid, R. Y. and Young, M. J. L. 1976. Some Arabic Legal Documents of the OttomanPeriod. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
  18. Edzard, Lutz. 1996. Stylistic Elements in the Use of Arabic as Language of Diplomacy:
  19. Recent Developments in United Nations Context. Die Welt des Islams 36 no. 1:25-58._____ .1997. Language as a Medium of Legal Norm: The Topics of ‗War and Peace‘ and‗Human Rights‘ in bi-and Multilateral Treaties with Arab States andOrganizations‘. In Edzard and Szyska (1997), Encounters of Words and Texts:
  20. Intercultural Studies in Honor of Stefan Wild, Hildesheim /New York: GeorgOlms Verlag.
  21. _____ .1998. Language as a Medium of Legal Norms: Implications of the Use of Arabicas a Language in the United Nations System, Berlin: Duncker and Humblot.
  22. Erickson, B. et al. 1978. Speech Style and Impression Format in Court Setting: theEffects of Powerful and Powerless Speech. Journal of Experimental SocialPsychology 14: 266-279.
  23. Fowler, R. 1991. Language in News. Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London:Routledge.
  24. Garre, Marrianne. 1999. Human Rights in Translation: Legal Concepts in DifferentLanguages. Denmark: Copenhagen Business School Press.
  25. Gibbons, John. 1994. Language and the Law. London/ New York: Longman.
  26. _____. 2003. Forensic Linguistics: An Introduction of the Language in the JusticeSystem. Oxford: Blackwell.
  27. Goodrich, Peter.1987. Legal Discourse: Studies in Linguistics, Rhetoric and LegalAnalysis. Macmillan Press.
  28. Gustafsson, M. 1975. Some Syntactic Properties of English Law Langauge. Turku/Finland: University of Turku, 4.Haigh, Rupert. 2004. Legal English. London: Cavendish Publishing.
  29. Hassan, Aboudi, J. 2005a. Repetition as a Means of Disambiguation, Turjuman 14, no 1:85-111.
  30. Hatim, Basil. 1994. English-Arabic-English Translation: A Practical Guide. Morocco:The King Fahd School of Translation.
  31. Hatim, Basil and I. Mason. 1997. The Translator as Communicator. London/ New York:Routletledge.
  32. Holes, Clive. 1984. ‗Textual Approximation in the Teaching of Academic Writing toArab Students: A Contrastive Approach‘. In J. Swales and H. Mustafa (ed):English for Specific Purposes in the Arab World, Birmingham: University ofAston.
  33. _____. 2004. Modern Arabic: Structures, Functions, and Varieties, Washington DC:Georgetown University Press.
  34. Kittredge, Richard and John Lehrberger. 1982. Sublanguage: Studies of Language inRestricted Semantic Domain. Berlin/New York: Walter de Grayter.
  35. Kurzon, Dennis. 1986. It is Hereby Performed: Explorations in Legal Speech Acts.Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  36. Lataiwish, Muftah S. 1995. An Analysis of Literary Translation Arabic/English. Un-Published PhD Thesis: University of Glasgow.
  37. Matulewska, Alexandra. 2007. Lingua Legis in Translation, Europaischer Verlag derWissenschaften, Peter Lang.
  38. Maley, Yon. 1994. ‗The Language of the Law‘. In Gibbons: Language and the Law.London New York: Longman.
  39. Mansoor, M. 1965a. Legal and Documentary Arabic Reader (vol. 1), Leiden: E.J.Brill.
  40. ______1965b. Legal and Documentary Arabic Reader (vol. 2), Leiden: E.J.Brill.
  41. Mellinkoof, David. 1963. The Language of the Law, Boston: Little, Brown.
  42. _____ 1983. ‗The Myth of Precision and the Law Dictionary‘, UCLA. Law Review.31:423.
  43. Meredith, Clive, R. 1979. ‗Some Notes on Legal English‘. Meta 24, no. 1: 54-67.
  44. Newmark, Peter .1982. Approaches to Translation, Oxford: Pergamon.
  45. _____ .1988. A Textbook to Translation, London: Prentice Hall.
  46. O‘Barr, William, M. 1982. Linguistic Evidence: Language, Power and Strategy in theCourtroom. New York: Academic Press.
  47. Palmer, F. R. 1990. Modality and the English Modals, London: Longman.
  48. Quirk, Randolph, S. Greenbaum, G. Leech, and J. Svartvik. 1985. A ComprehensiveGrammar of the English Language, London: Longman.
  49. Ryding, Karin C. 2005. A Reference Grammar of Modern Standard Arabic. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
  50. Ńarčević, Susan. 1997. New Approach to Legal Translation. London/ Boston: KluwerLaw International.
  51. Schäffner, Christina. 1997. ‗Strategies of translating political Texts‘. In Text Typologyand Translation, ed. Trosborg, A. Amsterdam/Phliladelphia: John BenjaminsPublishing Company.
  52. Shunnaq, A. 2000. Arabic – English Translation of Political Speeches. Perspectives:Studies in Translatology 8, no. 3: 207-228.
  53. Sulieman, Yasir. 1999. Arabic Grammar and Linguistics. Great Britain: Curzon.
  54. Tiersma, Peter M. 1999. Legal Language. Chicago/London: The University of ChicagoPress.
  55. Trosborg, A. 1995a. Introduction: Special Issue on Laying down the Law-DiscourseAnalysis of Legal Institutions. Journal of Pragmatics 23, no. 1: 1-5.
  56. _____. 1995b. ‗Statutes and Contracts: An Analysis of Legal Speech Acts in the EnglishLanguage of Law‘. Journal of Pragmatics 23, no. 1: 31-53.
  57. _____. 1997. Rhetorical Strategies in Legal Language: Discourse Analysis of Statutesand Contracts. Germany: Gunter Narr Verlag Tubingen