Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Legal translation
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
PL
Inaczej niż europejskie, większość amerykańskich regulacji prawnych została stworzona na tyle niedawno, że terminologia użyta w tekstach prawodawczych nie zdążyła jeszcze zmienić swojego znaczenia. Ta reguła nie tyczy się jednak konstytucji Stanów Zjednoczonych, która została sformułowana w końcu XVIII w. W Stanach Zjednoczonych trwają obecnie dyskusje nad tym, czy właściwie interpretuje się konstytucję oraz jak jej współczesne rozumienie ma się do jej pierwotnego znaczenia. Czy powinniśmy skupiać się na pierwotnym znaczeniu terminów użytych przez autorów konstytucji czy na tym jak te terminy są rozumiane przez ogół współczesnego społeczeństwa, który głosował za przyjęciem konstytucji? Obecnie, w czasach popularności językoznawstwa korpusowego i po stworzeniu rozległego korpusu XVII wiecznej angielszczyzny znalezienie odpowiedzi na to pytanie może być możliwe.
EN
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.
EN
Abstract: In this paper we examine translation arising in court cases involving reputational damage. A diachronic and tightly focused cross-jurisdictional selection of examples from case law is used to highlight the range of ways in which translation can be employed, blamed, or relied upon by the parties and by the courts, and we glimpse how translations can be a source of libel, a defence against libel, or a gateway to libellous material, how crucial translation can be in protecting or damaging reputations, and how significantly it can affect a case’s outcome. We apply Engberg’s lens for communication in legal contexts, distinguishing micro, meso and macro occurrences of translation at publisher/business/individual, judicial, and State levels. Recurring translation-related topics either mooted by courts or arising in our analysis are then outlined, including: competing translations; translation techniques; translator identification; online translation; how the acceptance of jurisdiction may be influenced by translation requirements; and how judges approach decision-making when foreign language documents and translation are involved.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.