Main Article Content
European courts and legal scholars are accustomed to construing codes that have been in place for long periods of time. In the U.S., most laws are recent enough that the meanings of their words have not changed very much over time. This, however, is not true of the Constitution, which was adopted in the late 18th century. There are debates in the U.S. about how faithful current interpreters of the Constitution should be to the original meaning of the Constitution’s language, and over what it means to be faithful to the original meaning of the Constitution’s language. Should we care about what the original drafters had in mind, or about how the public that voted on the Constitution understood the language? Scholars and judges have turned to old dictionaries for help. Now, however, corpus linguistics has entered the scene, including a new corpus of general 18th century English. In this paper, I will suggest that scholars and judges interested in the meanings of the words as then understood should put themselves in the position of lexicographers writing a bilingual dictionary that translates the terms from a foreign languageinto contemporary English. Such a stance will bring out the many difficult problems in using a corpus as a means of making legal decisions today.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International 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.
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.
a) The agreement was concluded for an unspecified time.
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
- Ainsworth, Janet. 2014. Lost in Translation? Linguistic Diversity and the Elusive Quest for Plain Meaning in Law. In The Ashgate Handbook of Legal Translation (Le Cheng, King Kui and Anne Wagner, eds.), 43-55. Surrey, England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
- Baaij, Cornelis J. W. 2012(a). Fifty Years of Multilingual Interpretation in the European Union. In Oxford Handbook of Language and Law (Peter M. Tiersma and Lawrence M. Solan, eds.), pp 217-231. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Baaij, Cornelis J.W. 2012(b). The Significance of Legal Translation for Legal Harmonization. In C.J.W. Baaij (ed.), The Role of Legal Translation in Legal Harmonization. Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.
- Baaij, Cornelis J.W. 2015. Legal Integration and Linguistic Diversity, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Faculty of Law, University of Amsterdam.
- Balkin, Jack. 2011. Living Originalism. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
- Beaupré, Michael. 1988. Litigating the Meaning of Bilingual Legislation, In Advocate’s Quarterly 9: 327-340.
- Cao, Deborah. 2007. Inter-Lingual Uncertainty in Bilingual and Multilingual Law. In Journal of Pragmatics 39: 69-83.
- Durant, Alan. Forthcoming. Seeing Sense: The Complexity of Key Words that Tell us What the Law Is. In Meaning and Power in the Language of Law (J. Leung and A. Durant, eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Dworkin, Ronald. 1988. Law’s Empire. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
- Eskridge, William N., Jr. 2016. Interpreting Law: A Primer on How to Read Statutes and the Constitution. St. Paul, Minnesota: Foundation Press.
- Fuller, Lon L. 1958. Positivism and Fidelity to Law – A Reply to Professor Hart, Harvard Law Review 71: 630-672.
- Hart, H.L.A. 1958. Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals, Harvard Law Review 71: 593-629.
- Hendry, Jennifer. 2014. Legal Comparison and the (Im)possibility of Legal Translation. In Comparative Law: Engaging Translation (Simone Glanert, ed.). New York: Routledge, 87-103.
- Husa, Jaakko. 2012. Understanding Legal Languages: Linguistic Concerns of the Comparative Lawyer. In The Role of Legal Translation in Legal Harmoization C.J.W. Baaij, ed.), 161-182. Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.
- Khan, Ali. 1999. The Evolution of Money: A Story of Constitutional Nullification. University of Cincinnati Law Review 67: 393-443.
- Kjær, Anne Lise. 2007. Legal Translation in the European Union : A Research Field in Need of a New Approach. In Language and the Law: International Outlooks (Krzysztof Kredens and Stanislaw Gozdz-Roszkowski, eds.). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
- Kjær, Anne Lise. 2015. Theoretical Aspects of Legal Translation in the EU: The Paradoxical Relationship between Language, Translation and the Autonomy of EU Law. In Susan Šarčević (ed.), Language and Culture in EU Law: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 91-107. Surrey, England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
- Kosem, Iztok. 2016. Interrogating a Corpus. In The Oxford Handbook of Lexicography (Philip Durkin, ed.), 76-93. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Lessig, Lawrence. 1993. Fidelity in Translation. Texas Law Review 71: 1165-1268.
- Leung, Janny H.C. 2014. Translation Equivalence as Legal Fiction. In Cheng, Le, King Kui and Anne Wagner (eds.), The Ashgate Handbook of Legal Translation, 57-69. Surrey, England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
- Macdonald, Roderick A. 1997. Legal Bilingualism. McGill Law Journal 42: 119-16.
- Mouritsen, Stephen C. 2010. Note, The Dictionary Is Not a Fortress: Definitional Fallacies and a Corpus-Based Approach to Plain Meaning. Brigham Young University Law Review 2010: 1915-1978.
- Phillips, James C., Daniel M. Ortner, and Thomas R. Lee. 2016. Corpus Linguistics & Original Public Meaning: A New Tool to Make Originalism More Empirical. Yale Law Journal Forum 126.
- Šarčević, Susan. 2012. Legal Translation: Possible, but not Perfect. In Peter M. Tiersma and Lawrence M. Solan (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law, 187-199. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Scalia, Antonin. 1997. A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
- Schauer, Frederick. 2015.On the Relationship Between Legal and Ordinary Language. In Speaking of Language and Law: Conversations on the Work of Peter Tiersma (Lawrence Solan, Janet Ainsworth, and Roger W. Shuy, eds.). New York: Oxford University Press.
- Slocum, BrianG. 2015. Ordinary Meaning: A Theory of the Most Fundamental Principle of Legal Interpretation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Solan, Lawrence M. 2009. The Interpretation of Multilingual Statutes by the European Court of Justice. In Brooklyn Journal of International Law 34: 277-301.
- Solan, Lawrence M. 2010. The Language of Statutes: Laws and their Interpretation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Solan, Lawrence M. 2014. Multilingualism and Morality in Statutory Interpretation. In Language and Law/Linguagem e Direito 1: 5-21.
- Solan, Lawrence M. 2016. Can Corpus Linguistics Help Make Originalism Scientific? Yale Law Journal Forum 126.
- Solum, Lawrence. 2015. The Fixation Thesis: The Role of Historical Fact in Original Meaning. In Notre Dame Law Review 91: 1-78.
- Stein, Mark S. 2009. The Domestic Violence Clause in ‘New Originalist’ Theory. In Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly 37: 129-140.
- Stoyanov, Dimitar. 2016. Causa and Consideration: A Comparative Overview. In CKS 2016: Challenges of the Knowledge Society. Bucharest: Nicolai Titulescu University Publishing House, available at http://ssrn.com/abstract+2819799.
- Sullivan, Ruth. 2004. The Challenges of Interpreting Multilingual, Multijural Legislation. In Brooklyn Journal of International Law 29: 985-1066.
- White, James Boyd. 1990. Justice as Translation: An Essay in Cultural and Legal Criticism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Whittington, Keith E. 1999. Constitutional Interpretation: Textual Meaning, Original Intent, and Judicial Review. Lawrence Kansas: University Press of Kansas.
- Winter, Steven S. 2001. A Clearing in the Forest: Life, Law, and Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Zweigert, Konrad and Hein Kötz. 1996. Introduction to Comparative Law (Second Revised Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.