Advertisement

Rethinking the English–Arabic Legal Translation Course: Restructuring for Specific Competence Acquisition

  • Sonia Asmahène HalimiEmail author
Article
  • 65 Downloads

Abstract

The standards for translating texts in specialized fields have become particularly rigorous with the increasing complexity of material and growing demand for its translation. While translations simply aimed at communication and produced by machine translation are proliferating, the need for reliable and high-quality translations is also increasing. The demand for expert-dependable legal translation is higher than ever, requiring competence-based training in the field of legal translation. This paper describes a guided-task framework for developing subject area competence at the earliest stage of an English–Arabic legal translation course. It presents the three most problematic phases of concept processing in legal translation in terms of: (a) legal systems; (b) branches of law; and (c) genre-based phraseology. The approach presented below is part of a more general study that aims to describe the first course in a series of three graduate courses on legal translation, each of them motivated by a guided-task framework that has the aim of developing three specific competences in legal translation: (a) legal concept processing => subject area competence; (b) documentary research => instrumental competence; and (c) legal rhetorics => communicative and textual competence. In this paper we intend to focus on the first course of legal concept processing as a key prerequisite for legal knowledge development. We illustrate the relevance of addressing specific variables (legal systems, branches of law and genre-based phraseology) when analysing legal concepts in the text that is to be translated, before proceeding to the information search and communication, according to established formulae and conventions.

Keywords

English–Arabic legal translation Translation didactics Subject-area competence Legal Arabic concept processing Genre-based Arabic phraseology 

References

  1. 1.
    Alves, Fabio and José Luiz Gonçalves. 2007. Modelling translator’s competence: Relevance and expertise under scrutiny. In Translation studies: Doubts and directions. Selected contributions from the EST Congress, Lisbon 2004, ed. Yves Gambier, Miriam Shlesinger and Radegundis Stolze, 41–55. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Biel, Lucia. 2014. Phraseology in legal translation: A corpus-based analysis of textual mapping in EU law. In The Ashgate handbook of legal translation, ed. Le Chen, King Kui Sin, and Anne Wagner, 178–192. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cao, Deborah. 2007. Translating law. Clevedon, Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cao, Deborah. 2014. Teaching and learning legal translation. De Gruyter Mouton. https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/semi.2014.2014.issue-201/sem-2014-0022/sem-2014-0022.pdf. Accessed 13 April 2017.
  5. 5.
    Colina, Sonia. 2003. Teaching translation. From research to the classroom. Boston: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Colson, Jean-Pierre. 2008. Cross-linguistic phraseological studies. An overview. In Phraseology: An Interdisciplinary perspective, ed. Sylviane Granger and Fanny Meunier, 191–206. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cornu, Gérard. 2005. Le vocabulaire juridique. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cotterrell, Roger. 2006. Law, culture and society. Legal ideas in the mirror of social theory. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Groot, G.-R. 2006. Legal translation. In Elgar Encyclopedia of comparative law, ed. J.M. Smits, 423–433. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gile, Daniel. 1995. Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    González Davies, M. 2004. Multiple voices in the translation classroom. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gouadec, Daniel. 2007. Translation as a profession. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gozdz-Roszkowski, Stanislaw. 2011. Patterns of linguistic variation in American legal English. A corpus-based study. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harvey, Malcolm. 2000. A Beginner’s course in legal translation: the Case of culture-bound terms. Tradulex. http://www.tradulex.com/Actes2000/harvey.pdf. Accessed 20 April 2017.
  15. 15.
    Hashim Kamali, Mohammad. 2006. Qawa’id al-Fiqh: The legal maxims of Islamic law. The Association of Muslim Lawyers, UK. http://www.iais.org.my/e/index.php/publications-sp-1447159098/selections/item/49-qawa%E2%80%98id-al-fiqh-the-legal-maxims-of-islamic-law.html. Accessed 28 May 2017.
  16. 16.
    Hurtado Albir, A. 2007. Competence-based curriculum design for training translators. The Interpreter and translator training 1(2): 163–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kaczmarek, Karolina. 2017. Investigating equivalents in Polish-Hungarian translation: A Contrastive parametric study of legal terminology. In Dissertationes legilinguisticae 6. Legilinguistic studies 6. Studies in legal language and communication, ed. Aleksandra Matulewska and Karolina Gortych-Michalak, 1–141. Poznan: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Contact.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kelly, Dorothy. 2005. A Handbook for translator trainers. St Jerome: A guide to reflective practice. Manchester.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kiraly, Don. 1995. Pathways to translation: Pedagogy and process. Kent: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kiraly, Don. 2013. Towards a view of translator competence as an emergent phenomenon: Thinking outside the box(es) in translator education. In New prospects and perspectives for educating language mediators, ed. Don Kiraly, Silvia Hansen-Schirra, and Karin Maksymski, 197–224. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kjaer, Anne Lise. 1990. Phraseology research-state of the art Methods of describing word combinations in language for specific purposes. Terminology Science and Research 1(1–2): 3–32.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kjaer, Anne Lise. 2007. Phrasemes in legal texts. In Praseologie/Phraseology: Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung/An International handbook of contemporary research, ed. Harald Burger, Dmitrij Dobrovol’skij, Peter Kühn, Neil R. Norrik, 2, 506-515. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kussmaul, Wolfgang. 1995. Training the translator. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lörscher, Wolfgang. 1995. Process oriented approaches to translation and the development of translation competence. In Basic issues in translation studies, ed. Albrecht Neubert, Gregory Shreve, and Klaus Gommlich, 113–122. Kent: Institute of Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lörscher, Wolfgang. 1995. Translation performance, translation process, and translation strategies. Gunter Narr: A Psycholinguistic investigation. Tubingen.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mattila, Heikki E.S. 2013. Comparative legal linguistics: Language of law, latin and modern lingua francas. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Matulewska, Aleksandra. 2017. Contrastive parametric study of legal terminology in Polish and English. In Dissertationes legilinguisticae 6. Legilinguistic studies 6. Studies in legal language and communication, ed. Aleksandra Matulewska and Karolina Gortych-Michalak, 1–183. Poznan: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Contact.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Neubert, Albrecht. 2000. Competence in language, in languages, and in translation. In Developing translation competence, ed. Christina Schäffner and Beverly Adab, 3–18. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nord, Christiane. 2005. Text Analysis in translation: Theory, methodology, and didactic application of a model for translation-oriented text analysis, 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Omar, Faridh. 2013. Al-Qawa’id al-Fiqhiyyah. Legal maxims of Islamic jurisprudence. A Translated compilation. Islamic University of North America (Mishkâh). http://www.academia.edu/26617835/Legal_Maxims_of_Islamic_Jurisprudence. Accessed 28 May 2017.
  31. 31.
    Pacte. 2003. Building a translation competence model. In Triangulating translation: Perspectives in process oriented research, ed. Fabio Alves, 43–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pontrandolfo, Guianluca. 2011. Phraseology in criminal judgements: A Corpus study of original vs. Translated Italian. Sendebar, 22, 209–234 http://www.academia.edu/11163652/Phraseology_in_Criminal_Judgments_A_Corpus_Study_of_Original_vs._Translated_Italian. Accessed 30 April 2017.
  33. 33.
    Prieto Ramos, F. 2011. Developing legal translation competence: An integrative process-oriented approach. Comparative Legilinguistics International Journal for Legal Communication 5: 7–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Prieto Ramos, Fernando. 2014. International and supranational law in translation: From multilingual lawmaking to adjudication. The Translator 20(3): http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13556509.2014.904080.
  35. 35.
    Pym, Anthony. 2003. Redefining translation competence in an electronic age: In defence of a minimalist approach. Meta 48(4): 481–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Šarčević, Susan. 1997. New approach to legal translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Šarčević, Susan. 2000. Legal translation and translation theory: a receiver-oriented approach. Tradulex. http://www.tradulex.com/Actes2000/sarcevic.pdf. Accessed 20 April 2017.
  38. 38.
    Šarčević, Susan. 2001. Basic principles of term formation in the multilingual and multicultural context of law. In Language and culture in the EU law: Multidisciplinary perspectives, ed. Susan Šarčević, 183–206. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Shreve, Gregory M. 2006. The Deliberate practice: Translation and expertise. Journal of Translation studies 9(1): 27–42.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Swales, John. 1900. Genre analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tiersma, Peter. 1999. Legal language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Way, Catherine. 2014. Structuring a legal translation course: A framework for decision-making in legal translator training. In The Ashgate handbook of legal translation, ed. Le Chen, King Kui Sin, and Anne Wagner, 135–152. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zakariyah, Luqman. 2015. Legal maxims in Islamic criminal law. Theory and application. Brill. Arab and Islamic Laws Series. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004304871_003.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of TranslationFaculty of Translation and InterpretingGenève 4Switzerland

Personalised recommendations