Title: A bilingual Glossary (English Spanish) of Legal Terms

Texto completo

(1)CENTRAL UNIVERSITY “MARTA ABREU” OF LAS VILLAS School of Humanities. Diploma Paper Title: A bilingual Glossary (English-Spanish) of Legal Terms Author: Dayron Miguel Díaz Torres Supervisor: Full Professor Mayra Rodríguez Ruiz, PhD. June, 2017.

(2) Hacemos constar que el presente trabajo fue realizado en la Universidad Central "Marta Abreu" de las Villas como parte de la culminación de los estudios de la especialidad de Lengua Inglesa, autorizando a que el mismo sea utilizado por la Institución para los fines que estime conveniente, tanto de forma parcial como total y que además no podrá ser presentado en eventos ni publicados sin autorización de la Universidad.. ___________________________________ Firma de los Autores. Los abajo firmantes certificamos que el presente trabajo ha sido realizado según acuerdo de la dirección de nuestro centro y el mismo cumple con los requisitos que debe tener un trabajo de esta envergadura referido a la temática señalada.. _________________ Firma del Tutor. __________________________ Firma del Jefe de Departamento.

(3) We certify that the present Diploma Paper was carried out at the Universidad Central "Marta Abreu" de Las Villas to fulfill the requirements of the curricula for the training of Bachelors in English Language with a Second Foreign Language: French. We give our approval for it to be partially or totally used by the institution for educational purposes. This Diploma Paper can be neither published nor discussed in any forum without the approval of the University.. ________________________________ Signature of the Author. We, the undersigned, hereby certify that the present Diploma Paper has been carried out with the approval of the institution authorities and that it meets the requirements and regulations established for this activity in the given subject.. _____________________ Signature of the Supervisor. ________________________ Signature of the Head of Department.

(4) “Without translation, i Would be limited to the borders of my own country. The translator is my most important ally. He introduces me to the world.” Italo Calvino.

(5) DEDICATION To my parents and my grandmother, for their unconditional support in life. To my brother Darián who is always by my side..

(6) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTs To God, for his great help and love during all these years. To my supervisor Mayra Rodríguez Ruiz, PhD, whose knowledge and expertise inspired me to continue this research till the end. This study was only possible thanks to her patience and valuable insights. To Professor Manuel Llanes Abeijón, for his never-ending willingness to contribute to the final product of this research. To all the professors who taught me throughout these six years. All of them played a significant role in my formation to be a professional. To all the specialists for their meaningful suggestions and comments about this research. To my aunt María Lucía, whose wisdom has always led me to make good decisions. To my friends who have always encouraged me to pursue my dreams. To my pastors for their guidance and prayers. To my former professor Daniel Almeida whose lessons made me love this English course. To my 7th grade English teacher Lucía Guzmán who was my inspiration to study the English Language. To all my classmates who were by my side during the whole course. I really appreciate their company as my friends..

(7) ABSTRACT. Abstract The translation of legal documents has become an all-important pursuit in the current international arena. Its main target is to link cultures and societies that have been so far distant. The goal of this diploma paper is to elaborate a bilingual glossary (English-Spanish) of legal terms for fourth year students of the degree course English Language with French as a Second Language from the Central University “Marta Abreu” of Las Villas. To achieve this purpose, a 450-text corpus consisting of acts, bills and proclamations taken from the websites of The White House and US Congress respectively was compiled and processed by a corpus analysis software called AntConc. The elaborated glossary of legal terms, along with their Spanish equivalents will help improve the students’ lexical competence regarding law and their performance in the translation process. Key words: translation, terminology, corpus analysis, glossary, legal terms..

(8) TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of contents. Page. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………… 1 Chapter 1: Theoretical framework 1.1 General language and specialized languages……………………………………. 1.1.1 The officialese as a form of specialized language……………………………… 1.1.2 The language of legal documents………………………………………………... 1.1.2.1 Lexical features…………………………………………………………………... 1.1.2.2 Syntactic features………………………………………………………………... 1.2 Terminology…………………………………………………………………………… 1.2.1 Terms and words…………………………………………………………………… 1.2.2 Terminology and translation………………………………………………………. 1.2.3 Terminology in practice: Terminography………………………………………… 1.3 General translation and specialized translation…………………………………… 1.3.1 Legal Translation as a form of specialized translation………………..……….. 1.4 Lexicology and lexicography………………………………………………………… 1.5 Corpus linguistics…………………………………………………………………….. 1.6 Corpus analysis………………………………………………………………………. 1.6.1 Types of corpora…………………………………………………………………… 1.6.2 Criteria for the compilation of a corpus: representativeness, size and balance…………………………………………………………………………………….. 1.7 The glossary as a tool for translators………………………………………………. 1.7.1 Macrostructure and microstructure of a glossary……………………………….. 1.8 Partial conclusions…………………………………………………………................ 7 9 10 11 14 17 17 19 21 23 24 26 29 32 33 35 37 38 40. Chapter 2: Creation of a terminological glossary of legal terms: Data analysis and results 2.1 Methodology followed…………...…………………………………………………… 2.2 Characterization of the sample……………………………………………………… 2.3 Stages of the Creation of the Bilingual Glossary of Legal Terms………………. 2.3.1 Definition of the Glossary………………………………………………………….. 2.3.2 Research about the domain of specialty the glossary encompasses………… 2.3.3 Corpus compilation and analysis…………………………………………………. 2.3.3.1 Processing of the Corpus Using the Software AntConc 3.5.0 (Windows)…. 2.3.4 Definition of terms and creation of the terminological entries…………………. 2.3.5 Revision and assessment of the glossary……………………………………….. 2.3.6 Edition of the glossary……………………………………………………………... 2.3.6.1 Macrostructure…………………………………………………………………… 2.3.6.2 Microstructure……………………………………………………………………. 2.4 Sample of the glossary...…………………………………………………………….. 2.5 Assessment of the glossary by specialists………………………………………… Conclusions……………………………………………………………………………….. Recommendations………………………………………………………………………... 41 41 42 42 43 43 44 46 48 49 49 49 50 58 60 62.

(9) TABLE OF CONTENTS Bibliographical references Bibliography Appendixes.

(10) INTRODUCTION. Introduction The practice of translation has been an intrinsic part of the human being since the early stages of humanity. Since the evolution of this discipline, one of its major contributions has been the bridging of different cultures and societies, taking the world interconnectedness to unprecedented levels, which is manifested in every area of everyday life. There is a new cultural openness in today`s world brought about by several determining factors such as the incredible progress in global communications, including such technologies as satellite communications, computers, modem, fax, email, and the Internet, the fast-growing international trade throughout the entire world, as well as the new international awareness of many languages and cultures that for centuries were subjugated and suppressed. The world today, rather than being dominated by a few colonialist languages such as French, English or Spanish, is finally reaching a stage of linguistic and cultural equality where literally hundreds of languages and dialects are beginning to play a part in the global tapestry of human interaction. As a result, hundreds of new dictionaries and glossaries are being published all over the world; language courses are being offered everywhere in an incredibly large number of languages, and the demand for competent translators is growing at a steady rate. Undoubtly, all this shows that the role of translation is once again becoming critical in shaping history and helping civilization make the transition into the next age. Gouadec (2007) summarizes the role of the translator arguing that the translator is a key factor in the process of importing or exporting ideas, concepts, thought processes, discourse structures, pre-conceived ideas, machines, services, myths and so on. He is also a vital go-between in operations and actions involving international co-operation (customer information, extradition procedures, sales, purchases, exchanges, travel, etc.). He is in fact an extremely powerful and critical agent facilitating and even at times enabling economic, strategic, cultural, technical, literary, legal, scientific and ideological exchanges throughout the world (Gouadec, 2007).. 1.

(11) INTRODUCTION. Regarding the complex process of translation, Maria Tymoczko and Edwin Gentzler agree that it is not simply an act of faithful reproduction but, rather, a deliberate and conscious act of selection, assemblage, structuration, and fabrication – and even, in some cases, of falsification, refusal of information, counterfeiting, and the creation of secret codes. In these way translators, as much as creative writers and politicians, participate in the powerful acts that create knowledge and shape culture (Tymoczko & Gentzler, 2002). Due to the complexity of the translation process, one of the most important aspects of the translator`s job is the management of terminology: being exposed to it, evaluating its correctness or appropriateness in specific contexts, storing and retrieving it. The focal nature of Terminology for translation has made its studies one of the key subdisciplines within the broader field of translation studies, that is why learning specialized terminology is one of the main emphases in any course on legal, medical, commercial, or other technical translation (Robinson, 1997). Terminology management is probably the most critical aspect of specialized translation. It often makes the difference between a good translator and an excellent one. The better you manage terminology, and the more extensive your up-to-date terminology sources are, the higher your chance is to be looked upon as a truly reliable translator in a given field. Words are the building blocks of language. It is commonly acknowledged that one distinctive feature of legal language is the complex and unique legal vocabulary. Legal terminology is the most visible and striking linguistic feature of legal language as a specialized language, and it is also one of the major sources of difficulty in translating legal documents. This common feature of the language of law is found in most languages, but there are unique features in each. The legal vocabulary in a language, including both legal concepts and legal usage, is extensive. It results from and reflects the law of the particular legal system that utilizes that language. Words matter. In law, words often 2.

(12) INTRODUCTION. become points of legal contention. In translation, due to the systemic differences in law, many legal words in one language do not find ready equivalents in another, causing both linguistic and legal complications (Cao, 2007). These complications along with the globalization of economy, the great development in information technology, and multiplying demands in the applied translation require more qualified and competent professional translators to meet the needs of translation in the current context. The development of lexical competence plays a significant role in the formation of competent translators in a given field. This development involves not only the translator’s degree of mastery of his languages of work but also the strategies to acquire and use this knowledge. Many authors have carried out different in-depth studies in the field of terminology and corpus linguistics focused on the creation of practical tools for the translator. With the impact of globalization there is a growing interest in the translation of official documents and therefore an increase in the elaboration of linguistic tools such as dictionaries and glossaries in this field. One of the most inclusive works in this field is the fourth edition of the Dictionary of Law by Collins P.H (2004). This work provides legal terms with their definitions but does not provide equivalents in Spanish. It has been observed that 4th year students of the degree course English Language with French as a Second Foreign Language at the Central University “Marta Abreu” of Las Villas face difficulties in the subject Traducción de Documentos Oficiales when it comes to translate legal texts from English into Spanish due to the complexity of this kind of text and its corresponding terminology. Another reason for this is the current limitation of bilingual reference sources so that students can improve their lexical competence in this field. This was confirmed with a preliminary survey (See Appendix 1) in which fourth year students referred to their perceptions concerning the availability of bilingual reference sources. Most of them expressed their need to increase the availability of bilingual linguistic tools for the subject Traducción de Documentos Oficiales.. 3.

(13) INTRODUCTION. This is the problem that led the author of the present research to state the following research question: How can the translation of legal documents by 4th year English Language students be improved? To answer this question, the following objectives have been established: OVERALL OBJECTIVE  To elaborate a bilingual glossary (English-Spanish) of legal terms SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES  To set the theoretical foundations related to general language and specialized languages, official documents, terminology, legal translation, lexicology, lexicography, corpus linguistics, corpus linguistic analysis and the glossary as a translation tool.  To design a bilingual glossary (English-Spanish) of legal terms  To assess the glossary through specialists` criteria The object of study of this diploma paper is the creation of a bilingual glossary (English-Spanish) of legal terms. The field of action is Terminology.. The Sample To carry out this study a sample of 450 texts was chosen for analysis. All the texts were taken from authentic sources such as the websites of The White House and the US Congress and were published between 2011 and 2016. In order to fulfill the previously mentioned objectives the following methods were implemented: Theoretical methods: These methods were followed to establish the research foundations.. 4.

(14) INTRODUCTION. Historical and logical method: to analyze the evolution of the concepts related to the topic of the research Analysis and synthesis: to contrast, analyze, evaluate and then generalize the existing tendencies and the collected data for the purpose of this diploma paper Structural-systemic: to guide the author throughout the whole research process and in the proposal from a logical and systematized view Empirical methods: Document analysis: to systematize information for selecting the corpus Corpus linguistics method: to determine the legal terms present in official documents and analyze their usage. Content analysis: To determine the corpus information regularities. Furthermore, it was useful to identify the terms included in the glossary proposed by the author. Survey: to confirm the need for this study and to determine the specialists’ opinion about the glossary concerning its accuracy of information, objectivity, currency, reliability, format and presentation. Percentage analysis: to process data obtained from surveys. This study has a practical contribution because the glossary proposed will enhance the lexical competence of 4th year students in the field of law. As the glossary is alphabetically-ordered, students will be able to improve their performance when taking translation exams and will not have to spend too much time consulting scattered sources related to the topic. Besides, this bilingual glossary can be a useful tool for translation teachers when preparing their lessons and even when choosing the corresponding texts for exams. Specialists in the field of law such as lawyers, law professors and students can also benefit from the glossary.. 5.

(15) INTRODUCTION. Structure of the diploma paper This diploma paper is structured into two chapters. Chapter 1 deals with the theoretical foundations concerning the officialese, terminology, legal translation, lexicology, lexicography, corpus linguistics, corpus linguistic analysis and the glossary as a translation tool. Chapter 2 outlines the methodological framework. The collection and selection of the sample as well as the stages for the creation of the glossary are explained. The author also shows the findings of the research that is, a bilingual glossary extracted from the corpus. The diploma paper is completed with conclusions and recommendations followed by the bibliography and the corresponding annexes.. 6.

(16) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. Chapter 1: Theoretical framework In this chapter the concepts of general language and specialized languages, official documents, terminology, legal translation, lexicology, lexicography, corpus linguistics, corpus linguistic analysis and the glossary as a translation tool are explored. These are all vital concepts for the final creation of the object of this diploma paper: a bilingual glossary (English-Spanish) of legal terms. 1.1 General language and specialized languages The first major issue is connected to the plurality of names given to what we call specialized languages. In English several terms such as special languages, specialized communication, technical English, scientific English, English for Specific Purposes, English for Occupational Purposes or more recently, Academic and Professional Languages are used (Kurtan, 2003). It is common to hear people making the distinction between general language and specialized languages; however, it is not always that easy to demonstrate where general language becomes specialized, and vice versa (Maia, 2001). Cabré (1992) speaks about special or specialized languages to refer to a set of subcodes (that partially overlap with the subcodes of the general language), each of which can be ’specifically’ characterized by certain particulars such as subject field, type of interlocutors, situation, speakers’ intentions, the context in which a communicative exchange occurs, the type of exchange, etc.. (Cabré,. 1992). In light of this, she assumes that: 1. Special subject fields are those that are not part of speaker`s general knowledge; they are the object of a specific learning process. 2. Speakers who have this type of knowledge are users of special languages, in other words, subject fields experts, although there is a distinction. between. originators. and. recipients. of. specialized. communication. Originators who produce specialized communication must have knowledge of a specific subject field which they have acquired 7.

(17) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. through training. In contrast, recipients can be other experts or the general public, which passively receives special communication while acquiring knowledge. 3. Communication in specialized knowledge is usually formal and occurs in situations governed by professional or scientific criteria. 4. Special languages are characterized by a number of language-based features (units and rules) and text-based features (text and document types). 5. Special languages share a number of pragmatic and language-based characteristics, thus allowing us to refer to them as a subset of the general language that presents a degree of unity. 6. Special languages are a subset of the language as a whole. They intersect with the general purpose language, with which it not only shares features but also maintains constant exchange of units and conventions (Cabré, 1992). The nature of language is such that general language and special languages can. be. accommodated. within. one. natural. language:. the. fundamental. characteristics of language are manifested both in English and in the language of chemical engineering, both in French and in the language of physics. The difference between general and special languages is a difference of degree rather than kind: the degree to which the fundamental characteristics of language are maximized or minimized in special languages. Special languages are used more self-consciously than general language and the situations in which they are used intensify the user`s concern with the language. It is therefore on the level of use that we look for more specific differentiating criteria (Cabré, 1992). According to Maia (2001), the notion of general language is suitably vague. The difficulties in defining it relate to descriptions like “everyday language”, and “language that any normal person can understand”, since they call into question the meaning of “everyday” and “normal person”. There is also the fact that, despite 8.

(18) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. an understanding that the level of the general language text should be accessible at the level of style and register, the lexical level will receive a more specific focus. Even if one describes it as “the most generic use of items of language”, or tries to restrict it to the language found in an “average” dictionary, it is still difficult, even with the help of dictionaries built using modern corpus based methods, to restrict and contain areas of language in any way (Maia, 2001). Maia (2001) continues arguing that many people look at specialized languages as simply the vocabulary of subjects to which, it is assumed, the average person will not have access. Nowadays, it is also recognized that there is more to special language than its vocabulary, and the study of genre analysis and text typology is an important part of the research into the use of specialized languages (Maia, 2001). 1.1.1 The officialese as a form of specialized language Galperin (2007) argues that one of the styles of language within the field of standard literary English is the style of official documents or officialese, as it is sometimes called. This functional style is represented by the following sub styles or variants: 1) The language of business documents 2) The language of legal documents 3) The language of diplomacy 4) The language of military documents Like other styles of language, the style of official documents has a definite communicative aim and, accordingly has its own system of interrelated language and stylistic means. The main aim of this type of communication is to state the conditions binding two parties in an undertaking. These parties may be the state and the citizens, or citizen and citizen; a society and its members (statute or ordinance), two or more enterprises or bodies (business correspondence and contracts); two or more governments (pacts, treaties); a person in authority and a subordinate (orders, regulations, instructions, authoritative directives); a board or 9.

(19) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. presidium and an assembly or general meeting (procedures, acts, minutes), etc. (Galperin, 2007). The aim of communication in this style of language is to reach agreement between two contracting parties. Even protest against violations of statutes, contracts, regulations, etc. can also be regarded as a form by which normal cooperation is sought on the basis of previously attained concordance. This most general function of the style of official documents predetermines the peculiarities of the style. The most striking, though not the most essential feature, is a special system of clichés, terms and set expressions by which each sub style can easily be recognized; for example, I beg to inform you, I beg to move, I second the motion, provisional agenda, Dear Sir, We remain, the above-mentioned, hereinafter named, on behalf of, private advisory, your obedient servants (Galperin, 2007). In fact, each of the subdivisions of this style has its own peculiar terms, phrases and expressions which differ from the corresponding terms, phrases and expressions of other variants of this style. Thus, in finance we find terms like extra revenue, taxable capacities, liability to profit tax. Terms and phrases like high contracting parties, to ratify and agreement, memorandum, pact, charge d`affaires, protectorate, extra-territorial status, plenipotentiary will immediately brand the utterance as belonging to the diplomatic style. In legal language, examples are: to deal with a case, summary procedure, a body of judges, as laid down in. Likewise, other varieties of official language have their special nomenclature, which is conspicuous in the text and therefore easily discernible as belonging to the official language style (Galperin, 2007). 1.1.2 The language of legal documents According to the Merriam-Webster`s 11th Collegiate Dictionary (2003), law can be defined as “a rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority”.. 10.

(20) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. Similarly, the fourth edition of the Dictionary of Law by Collins P.H (2004) defines law as “a written or unwritten rule by which a country is governed and the activities of people and organizations are controlled”. As the corpus selected for this research comprises acts, bills and proclamations from the United States government, this diploma paper follows the definition provided by the Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary (2009), which refers to law as “any system of regulations to govern the conduct of the people of an organization, community, society, or nation”. Legal language refers to the language of and related to law and legal process. It is a type of register, that is, a variety of language appropriate to different occasions and situations of use, and in this case, a variety of language appropriate to the legal situations of use (Cao, 2007). It is plainly clear that people find legal documents difficult to comprehend as compared with other professional expositions. There have been efforts in English speaking countries in the legal profession to simplify the language that law uses to make law more accessible to the average person. It is undeniable that certain idiosyncrasies are associated with the way lawyers speak and write (Cao, 2007). Law as a body of rules regulating the conduct of people, delineating the accepted social norms and human behaviour, is closely tied to the language that it uses and is constrained by language. Because of the nature and function of law, the language of the law has developed particular linguistic, lexical and syntactical features to fulfil the demands of the law and accommodate the idiosyncrasies of law and its applications. Such linguistic characteristics of legal language have profound implications for legal translation (Cao, 2007). 1.1.2.1 Lexical features The changing perspective of legal English vocabulary comprises archaic, technical and foreign words and phrases, as well as binomials. However, some of them are unnecessary. It is argued that the choice of words plays an important part in the ultimate goal of carrying out legal writing in Plain English. The avoidance of 11.

(21) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. complex, technical, foreign, redundant, rare, or jargon words and expressions is considered desirable (Stanojevic, 2011). However some authors go beyond this division. Garner considers "several types of words in legal prose: fancy words, vague words, euphemisms, timid phrases, empty dogmatisms, and neologisms" (Garner, 1986). Archaisms Archaic words are being used less frequently than other terms, so they became rather obscure in the course of time. The examples include adverb hereinafter, verb darraign, noun surrejoinder, and adjective aforesaid (Williams, 2004). Archaic terms belonging to formal style which are used by lawyers are called legalisms and lawyerisms, such as pursuant to (under, in accordance with), prior to (before), subsequent to (after), vel non (or not, or the lack of it) (Garner, 1986). The native expressions beginning with here and there (therein, hereunder, thereof, thereto) are regarded as rare and obscure in everyday English. There are plenty of suggestions to delete some of the given terms (hereby, hereunder) or replace them with. more. familiar. forms(hereinafter. /below,. herein. /in. this. Agreement,. hereinbefore/ above, hereto/ to this Agreement), which are taking their hold (Rylance, 1994). The same goes for prepositions:abutting/next to, anterior to/before, prior to/before. Claims that archaisms can easily be simplified are justified by the fact that an average person is usually ignorant of their meaning. Such is the case with circumlocutions which characterize legal writing and can be seen in prepositional phrases (in the event that in-stead of if). Some of them can be simplified as well: adequate number of /enough, at the time when/when, for the duration of/during, during such time as/while, the reason being that/because (Garner , 2002). Technical terms Technical terms or terms of art are pure legal terms. Some of them are familiar to laypersons (patent, share, royalty), while others are generally only known to lawyers (bailment, abatement). Apart from pure legal terms, there are also common words with uncommon meanings, i.e., polysemous lexemes which have 12.

(22) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. specific meaning within legal English, e.g., attachment, action, consideration, execute, party.These are the words legal professionals use as technical terms for their purposes in specific contexts. They are idiosyncratic because they have precise definitions in the domain of legal science. However, a special attention must be paid when legal meaning differs from the general meaning (consideration, construction, redemption, tender), or when everyday words are used in apparently peculiar contexts (furnish, prefer, hold) (Haigh, 2004). Nevertheless, terms of art are different from legal jargon. Words that are not precise enough belong to the legal jargon, which is a specialised language that enables a professional group to communicate quickly and efficiently. In this way internal communication of lawyers is improved, but individual meanings of terms become obscure for non-lawyers, who face the difficult task of deciphering them. Legal jargon has a number of specialized terms that lawyers invented to ease their communication, varying from slang or near-slang (horse case) to almost technically precise terms (res ipsa loquitur), but the legal jargon has not reached the level of professional, technical terms (Garner, 1986). Slang is another kind of informal sub-language which is present in law despite the fact that formal and stilted utterances are predominant. Lawyers use shortening (clippings), i.e., short terms within their slang, including depo (deposition), hypo (hypothetical example), punies (punitive damages), in pro per (in propria persona), rogs (interrogatories).While the above mentioned examples are informal, other terms, such as pro tem (pro tempore), can be found in the formal language of lawyers (Tiersma, 2000). Foreign words There is a considerable amount of foreign words and phrases in Legal English, which are mainly of Latin and French origin. Some of them look distinctively strange. Foreign words derived from Latin or French underwent either the process of transliteration or the direct borrowing process. The examples of native terms in legal English from the Anglo-Saxon period are: bequeath, goods, guilt, manslaughter, murder, oath, right, sheriff, steal, swear, theft, thief, ward, witness, 13.

(23) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. writ. However, foreign words became overwhelming. Latin introduced the practice of using the following expressions: versus, pro se, in propria persona, caveat emptor, obiter dictum, Amicus Curiae, which sometimes have a specific meaning. Words of Latin origin are negligence, adjacent, frustrating, inferior, legal, quit, subscribe (Crystal & Davy, 1969). The French influence reflects not only in the words of French origin (appeal,attorney,claim, complaint, counsel, court, damage, default, defendant, demurrer, evidence, indictment, judge, jury, justice, party, plaintiff, plea,sentence, sue, verdict), but also in the use of adjectives standing behind the nouns which they modify in phrases such as, attorney general, court martial, absolute,letters testamentary,. fee simple. malice aforethought, solicitor general. There are. derivatives with the 'ee' suffix denoting a person as a recipient of action, which are also of French origin (lessee (=the person leased to), asylee, condemnee, detainee, expellee, tippee (Crystal & Davy, 1969). Repetition of words The absence of anaphoric reference in legal English prompted the repetition of words. Anaphoric reference is being avoided despite the fact that it is used in other registers by means of personal pronouns, demonstrative adjectives and demonstrative pronouns. The nouns are being repeated instead of the pronouns; for it is not always clear which word in the text a certain pronoun refers to, which legal writing does not tolerate. Therefore, the repetition is used in order to avoid ambiguity (Stanojevic, 2011). 1.1.2.2 Syntactic features Sentence length The length and complexity of sentences are the most obvious syntactic features. Plain English movement disputed the structural complexity in legal writing and explored the opportunities for the shortening of sentences. Specific sentence structure is caused by the fact that in the past every part of a legal document used to consist of a single sentence. Sentences included a great deal of information, 14.

(24) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. repetitiveness, long noun phrases with plenty of modification, peculiar word order, prepositional phrases, as well as coordinate and subordinate clauses. As a result, lawyers are advised to measure the sentence length, or cut out superfluous words and sentences, or even delete redundant words and phrases. Only words that support the arguments given in the text add value to the sentence. However, when extra words are needed to maintain clarity, and when long sentences arise as a result, a possible solution is to utilize tabulated sentences (Rylance, 1994). Nominalization Nouns derived from verbs are often used instead of verbs, such as to give consideration instead of to consider, to be in opposition rather than to oppose, to be in contravention instead of to contravene, to be in agreement instead of to agree. Nominalization is a morphological process that is to be avoided because it makes the text long and non-dynamic. However, it is hard to eradicate nominalization, as lawyers do not say to arbitrate, but to go on arbitration, because the arbitration is a legally defined procedure and should be considered as such (Haigh, 2004). Impersonal style Dependent on which party they represent, lawyers make frequent use of features that reduce the agent in his identity while emphasizing the action – a matter of strategy which has the impeding of comprehension as a consequence (Schneidereit, 2004). The use of passive voice and peculiar use of pronouns are characteristics of a highly impersonal style of writing (Williams, 2004). Passive voice is inherent in legal language, but it is also overused in all types of legal documents. Legal drafters instinctively stick to it, so both laws and court decisions generally contain a verb in the passive, especially when obligation or condition is imposed. They tend to create the impression that such rules are infallible as they occur without the influence of the human agent. The legal drafters are encouraged to modify the texts by transforming passive voice into active, because the passive is justified only when the doer of the action is unknown or intentionally left out. The same goes for law (Stanojevic, 2011). 15.

(25) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. The omission of personal pronouns is another feature. Omission of the first person singular is motivated by the efforts of judges to achieve maximum objectivity. The omission of the second person singular is the characteristic of the written will. In this case, the first person singular is used instead. The second person singular is also omitted when there aren't direct orders and warnings or it is considered that legal rules should be impersonal. Thus, the use of the third person singular and plural is predominant. Everybody, everyone, every person is used when a provision applies to all, and no one, nobody is used in prohibitions. The intent is to create the impression that law is impartial, but such generalizations are vague, and their efficiency is often disputable (Stanojevic, 2011). One cannot conclude that lawyers use the language primarily to make it obscure to people who are not knowledgeable about law. The obscurity of legal English has grown out of legal tradition as a by-product of traditionally entrenched concepts. Despite the efforts to reform, changes in legal language are not considered to be radical. Although legal writing in plain English is promoted, plenty of issues still remain to be improved, and this goal is attainable. The general linguistic features of Legal English are changing. Legal English is undoubtedly better, but it is a common conclusion that those changes are going at a very slow pace, and it is still quite common to see typical binomials in legal documents. The elaborated proposals to reform legal language highlight the demands to create modern legal writing. Whether legal English can be simplified or not is highly disputable because all of its difficulties are deeply rooted in tradition (Stanojevic, 2011). Summing up, it can be pointed out that although people make the distinction between general language and specialized languages, it is not always easy to pinpoint where general language becomes specialized, and vice versa. Legal language as a register is a variety of language use of the technical nature. It shares the common core of general language but is not identical to ordinary language. There are lexical, syntactical and textual features that are singular to legal language as a technical language.. 16.

(26) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. 1.2 Terminology Terminology may be used to describe methods of collecting, disseminating and standardizing terms. This type of work is carried out by bodies concerned with making recommendations for the standardization of existing terminology and by those concerned with the collection and documentation of terminology, i.e. with the input to term banks, specialized dictionaries. It may be also used to describe the vocabulary of a special subject field, the collection of words which one would normally associate with a particular discipline. These may be nouns, verbs, adjectives or adverbs which are considered to have a clearly defined meaning when used in the context for which they have been defined (Pearson, 1988). The initial motivation for the study of terminology was both spontaneous, similar to the motivation for technology, and theoretical, as the motivation behind the birth of science. During the simultaneous expansion of knowledge and the growth of technology and communications in the eighteenth century, terminology was seen as a necessary tool for overcoming some of the difficulties associated with these multiple developments. Only in the twentieth century has terminology acquired a scientific orientation while at the same time being recognized as a socially important activity (Rey, 1995). 1.2.1 Terms and words Every professional involved in the field of translation must be very well acquainted with the proper use of words and terms in a given context. Specialized translation demands some expertise on the part of the translator concerning the difference between a word and a term so as to faithfully convey the same meaning into the target language. Sager (1990) offers the following distinction between “terms” and “words”: The lexicon of a special subject language reflects the organizational characteristics of the discipline by tending to provide as many lexical units as there are concepts conventionally established in the subspace and by restricting the reference of each such lexical unit to a well-defined 17.

(27) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. region. Besides containing a large number of items which are endowed with the property of a special reference the lexicon of a special language also contains items of general reference which do not usually seem to be specific to any discipline or disciplines and whose referential properties are uniformly vague or generalized. The items which are characterized by special reference within a discipline are the “terms” of that discipline, and collectively they form its “terminology”; those which function in general reference over a variety of sublanguages are simply called “words”, and their totality the “vocabulary” (Sager, 1990). Terms and words are similar and different at the same time. A word is a unit described by a set of systematic linguistic characteristics and has the property of referring to an element in reality. A term is a unit with similar linguistic characteristics used in a special domain. From this standpoint, a word of a special subject field would be a term: Thermometer (metrology) – an instrument used to measure temperature Thermometry (technology) – the technology of temperature measurement From a linguistic point of view, a word is a unit characterized by having a phonetic (and graphic) form, a simple or complex morphological structure, grammatical features, and a meaning that describes the class to which a specific object belongs. A term is also a unit presenting the same characteristics (Cabré, 1992). Other aspects also reinforce the difference between terms and words. Words are not just linguistic units that can be described solely from the standpoint of the system of the language; they are also communicative (pragmatic) units that identify speakers by the way they use words in specifc expressive or communicative situations. Pragmatics is the factor that most signifcantly differentiates terms from words. Pragmatically, terms and words differ with respect to their users, the situations in which they are used, the topics they communicate, and the type of discourse in which they usually occur (Cabré, 1992). 18.

(28) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. Users of words are all speakers of the language. Users of the terms are the professionals that deal with the special subject field in question. Words are used in widely varying situations, whereas the use of the terms of a special subject field is usually limited to professional circles. Terms are normally used to talk about specialized topics. In contrast, words are used to refer to any subject in daily life, to express feelings and give orders, and to refer to language itself. Finally, the types of discourse in which words are employed are less restricted than those in which terms are used. Terms usually appear in technical and scientifc discourse, i.e. in texts that are predominantly objective in nature (Cabré, 1992). 1.2.2 Terminology and translation Beside specialists, translators and interpreters are also major users of Terminology when they mediate communication between specialists. Translation is a process aimed at facilitating communication between speakers of different languages. Multilingual terminological activity supports technical translation. Translation implies understanding the source text and this requires knowledge of the specific terms of the source and target languages. This means, in turn, that technical translators must have some familiarity with the subject matter they are translating (Cabré, 1992). A good technical translation not only has to express the same content as the source text, but it also has to do so in the forms that a native reader of the target language would use. In the case of specialized translation, the reader will be a specialist in the field. As a result, good technical translators must choose the topics they want to work in and attain minimal competence in some specific field in order to be certain to respect the content and form of the two languages they work in. To do their job translators depend on bilingual or multilingual vocabularies of the terms occurring in the text. This does not mean, however, that translators do not prepare terminology themselves. On occasion they have to act as terminologists to find equivalents for those terms that are not listed in the available vocabularies nor in specialized data banks. Besides, the time constraints within which translators often. 19.

(29) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. have to work may not allow them to hand the task over to a terminologist. (Cabré, 1992). The study of Terminology in translator training should target the use of terms in real life contexts, and situate these specialized knowledge units within the context of dynamic communication processes. When the meaning and usage of terminological units are analyzed as they appear in texts, oral discourse, and communication situations, it becomes evident that the general language and specialized languages are not so very different. For example, polysemy and synonymy occur quite frequently in specialized communication, and generate translation problems. In contrast, standardization and neologisms, which are crucial issues in many traditional terminology programs, recede into the background (Montero, 2009). Farber (2004) argues that an important factor to be taken into account is that translators generally do not have the same level of expert knowledge as text originators and receivers. Consequently, they must learn how to rapidly situate terms within their respective conceptual systems. At the same time, this process should allow translators to increase their knowledge in the specialized domain so that it reaches the threshold that enables them to satisfactorily translate the original text (Farber, 2004). It goes without saying that the adequacy of the terminology in a text as well as its suitability for the level of specialization determines to a great extent the quality of a translation. This signifies that the translator must successfully deal with terminological problems during the analysis of the source text and the production of the target text. Obstacles to the transmission of specialized knowledge stem from the translator’s unfamiliarity with the terminological units, their meaning in discourse, and their possible correspondences in the target language (Rodríguez, 2002). In this regard, Neubert (2000) states that it is not necessary for translators to be experts in the specialized field. What is essential is that they be capable of rapidly acquiring expert knowledge. The ability to recognize concept systems 20.

(30) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. activated by terms in context does not transform translators into experts within the field, but provides them with the knowledge necessary to facilitate understanding and succeed in the process of information transfer and communication (Neubert, 2000). 1.2.3 Terminology in practice: Terminography One of the basic principles of terminological work is that it must abide by language rules. If the language must benefit from improvements, if the aim is to learn about it and to enrich it, terminological work can never occur without meeting the condition of complete respect for its structures. The practice of terminology is thus required to present language the way it is; to exploit its original content to the extent possible; and to shed light on the system and the lexicon that is at its base as precisely as possible (Halaoui, 1990). Terminography involves gathering, systematizing, and presenting terms from a specific branch of knowledge or human activity. The relationship of lexicology to lexicography is paralell to. that. which. exists between. terminology and. terminography, the application of terminology that deals with special language dictionaries. Even though it is practical in nature, terminography is not an independent activity that individual specialists can deal with on their own but is governed by a series of technical, formal, and procedural recommendations that have been internationally agreed (Cabré, 1992). Terminography must not be confused with translation. Translators need specifc terminology for specialized texts, but this does not imply that they themselves must develop the terminology, nor that they have to deal with all the terms in the special subject field in question. Working in terminology does not mean translating a term from one language into another based on supposedly equivalent designations, but gathering the designations that users of a language use to refer to a concept and ultimately, if necessary, proposing alternatives in those cases where speakers' designations are unsatisfactory. While translators are not terminographers, in daily practice the distinction between these two groups of professionals is often blurred (Cabré, 1992). 21.

(31) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. Terms for a special language glossary must be “collected'' from real texts, and not “invented'' or “created'' by terminologists. When specialists have to discuss a concept, they do not stop because of a lack of terminology. They always use specialized terms to express themselves, so the terms are there. Terminographers can always gather the terminology specialists use to communicate with each other, regardless of whether it is the most rigorous or appropriate or whether some designations are the best way to refer to a concept or not. The fact that a specifc terminology has a real presence in specialized texts, however, does not mean that it is necessarily the best one possible for a particular discipline. The absence of a certain topic in communication and specialized texts obviously implies a gap in terminology, and if detected by a terminologist, it is up to him or her to fill the gap with a neologism (Cabré, 1992). In addition, terminography is guided by the facts that terms are indivisible units with form and content; that the form and content of terms tends towards an unambiguous relationship; that terms have a fixed place within a specifc conceptual field, without which reference the term has no specifc meaning; and that concepts are related to other concepts in the specifc field they together constitute (Cabré, 1992). In short, Terminology is used to describe methods of collecting, disseminating and standardizing terms. This discipline is really significant since every professional involved in the field of translation must be familiar with the correct use of words and terms in a given context. On the other hand, Translation, understood as a process aimed at facilitating communication between speakers of different languages, has a close relationship with Terminology. This can be perceived when translators have to use the terminology of specialized texts in order to mediate communication between specialists. Terminography is practical in nature and is governed by a a series of technical, formal, and procedural recommendations that have been internationally agreed.. 22.

(32) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. 1.3 General translation and specialized translation The study of translation has been dominated by the debate about its status as an art or science. From these two viewpoints, many authors have defined it depending on their purpose and understanding of it. Bell (1993) defines it as the expression in another language (or target language) of what has been expressed in another, source language, preserving semantic and stylistic equivalences (Bell, 1993). The basic dividing line along which categories of translations are established runs between general translation and specialized translation. General translation refers to the translation of documents and materials that do not belong to any specific type or domain area, do not belong to any particular type, do not entail a specific translation process or the use of equipment beyond an ordinary computer and word processor (Gouadec, 2007). Generalist translators translate documents and materials, which cannot be labelled as belonging to a particular type and do not normally require a high degree of specialist or technical knowledge. The generalist translator usually touches on “all kinds of subject areas”, has a “whole range of clients” and rarely deal with large-scale translation projects (Gouadec, 2007). Specialized translation, on the other hand, can be defined as the translation of materials which refer to a highly specialized field of domain (e. g. law, finance, computer science, telecommunications, etc.). These materials are targeted at a particular audience or public through specific dissemination channels and/or are used by specialists in specific circumstances (Gouadec, 2007). Technically-speaking, specialized translation is not independent from general translation. Nevertheless, specialized translation relies on the nature of the text and the goal of translation. It also demands the translator to be competent in the field of the text of the source language, the mastery of both target and source languages and the knowledge of the specialization terminology (Newmark , 1988).. 23.

(33) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. 1.3.1 Legal Translation as a form of specialized translation Legal translation has played a very important part in the contact between different peoples and different cultures throughout history, and plays an even more vital role in our increasingly globalized world. Legal translation is a special and specialized area of translational activity because it involves law, and such translation can produce not just linguistic but also legal impact and consequence, precisely due to the special nature of law and legal language. Moreover, the translation of legal texts of any kind, from statute laws to contracts to courtroom testimony, is a practice that stands at the crossroads of legal theory, language theory and translation theory (Joseph, 1995). It is commonly acknowledged that legal translation is complex, and it requires special skills, knowledge and experience on the part of the translator to produce such a translation. It has been described as a category in its own right, and as “the ultimate linguistic challenge”, combining the inventiveness of literary translation with the terminological precision of technical translation (Harvey, 2002). Cao (2007) classifies legal translation into three categories in light of the purposes of the target language texts: Firstly, there is legal translation for normative purpose. It refers to the production of equally authentic legal texts in bilingual and multilingual jurisdictions of domestic laws and international legal instruments and other laws. They are the translation of the law. Often such bilingual or multilingual texts are first drafted in one language and then translated into another language or languages. They may also be drafted simultaneously in both or all languages. In either case, the different language texts have equal legal force and one is not superior to another irrespective of their original status. Such legal texts in different languages are regarded as authoritative once they go through the authentication process in the manner prescribed by law. This category of legal translation may also include private documents such as contracts, the bilingual texts of which are equally authentic in a bilingual or monolingual jurisdiction. (Cao, 2007). 24.

(34) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. Secondly, there is legal translation for informative purpose, with constative or descriptive functions. This includes the translation of statutes, court decisions, scholarly works and other types of legal documents if the translation is intended to provide information to the target readers. This is most often found in monolingual jurisdictions. Such translations are different from the first category where the translated law is legally binding. In this second category, the SL is the only legally enforceable language while the TL is not (Cao, 2007). Thirdly, there is legal translation for general legal or judicial purpose. Such translations are primarily for information, and are mostly descriptive. This type of translated document may be used in court proceedings as part of documentary evidence. Original SL texts of this type may include legal documents such as statements of claims or pleadings, contracts and agreements, and ordinary texts such as business or personal correspondence, records and certificates, witness statements and expert reports, among many others. The translations of such documents are used by clients who do not speak the language of the court, e.g. statements of claims, or by lawyers and courts who otherwise may not be able to access the originals such as contracts, correspondence or other records and documents. Such translated texts have legal consequences attached to them due to their use in the legal process (Cao, 2007). Cao (2007), also claims that legal translation refers to the translation of texts used in law and legal settings. Legal translation is used as a general term to cover both the translation of law and other communications in the legal setting. For the legal translator, it is important to ascertain the status and communicative purposes of both the original text and the translation (Cao, 2007). Since the development of translation studies, scholars have offered many descriptions of what the legal translator should be like and what skills such a translator should possess. Smith (1995) believes that there are three prerequisites for sucessful translation of legal texts: (1) the legal translator must acquire a basic knowledge of the legal systems, both in the source language and target language; (2) must 25.

(35) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. possess familiarity with the relevant terminology; (3) must be competent in the target language-specific legal writing style (Smith, 1995). Another slightly different description of the requirements is that the legal translator must possess the ability to retrieve information from the specialized source language, and the abilty to process information. In other words, the legal translator must understand all the shades of meaning of the source language so that he or she may reproduce it as faithfully and naturally as possible in the target language, and must understand all the mechanisms of the law, the way legal texts are drafted, interpreted and applied in legal practice (Wagner, 2003). Similarly, according to Sarcevic (1997), the legal competence of the translator presupposes not only in-depth knowledge of legal terminology, but also a thorough understanding of legal reasoning and the ability to solve legal problems, to analyze legal texts, to foresee how a text will be interpreted and applied by the court. In addition to these basic legal skills, the legal translator should also possess extensive knowledge of the target legal system and prefereably the source legal system as well (Sarcevic, 1997). Summing up, legal translation is critical in the building of bridges between cultures and peoples. Its complexity demands a certain degree of skill and expertise on the part of the translator. Cao (2007) classifies legal translation into three categories regarding the purposes of the target language texts: firstly, there is legal translation for normative purpose; secondly, there is legal translation for informative purpose, with constative or descriptive functions and thirdly, there is legal translation for general legal or judicial purpose. There are at least three prerequisites for a successful translation of legal texts: the legal translator must acquire some basic knowledge of the legal systems, both in the source language and target language, he/she must be familiar with the relevant terminology and must be competent in the target language specific legal writing style. 1.4 Lexicology and lexicography Lexicography is closely related to lexicology. Both words are derived from Greek lexikos, an adjective derived from noun lexis meaning “speech” or “word”. While 26.

(36) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. lexicology means “science of words”, lexicography means “writing of words”. Although both fields are closely related due to their common concerns for words or lexical units, lexicography depends heavily on lexicology in many ways. Words and their features are studied by both lexicology and lexicography. The sum total of all the words available in a language forms the vocabulary or lexical stock of that language (Sekhar, 2009). Although each word is an independent linguistic entity, it is indirectly related to other lexical items both paradigmatically and syntagmatically. While a paradigmatic relation is based on the interdependence of words within the lexical system, syntagmatic relations show words in their patterns of arrangement. The vocabulary of a language is not an arbitrary frame of diversified phenomena; it is a well-defined system that consists of interrelated elements, even though they are independent (Sekhar, 2009). As a phonological, grammatical and semantic unit a word is made of by a particular group of sounds, and it has grammatical and semantic functions. Lexicology studies a word in all these aspects exploring the patterns of its phonological, morphological and contextual behavior as well as its semantic relationships. A word often undergoes changes in its form and meaning with respect to its origin resulting from its development and current usage. Since a word does not occur in isolation, its combinatory possibilities are also studied in lexicology including its phrasal, idiomatic and proverbial functions (Sekhar, 2009). The domain of lexicology is both diachronic (i.e. historical) and synchronic (i.e. descriptive). From the diachronic viewpoint, it deals with the origin and development of the form and meaning of lexical units in a particular language across the time scale. From the synchronic perspective, it studies various aspects of the vocabulary of a language at a particular point of time. This implies that words in lexicology cannot be studied in isolation without close reference to other fields (Sekhar, 2009). Lexicogaphy also studies lexicon but from a different angle. While lexicology concentrates on the general properties and features that can be viewed as 27.

(37) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. systematic, lexicography typically deals with the individuality of each lexical unit (Zgusta, 1973). Lexicography is thus defined as the art of writing a dictionary or the science of compiling a dictionary. While lexicology studies words as elements of a system, lexicography approaches words as individual units with respect to their meaning and usage (Sekhar, 2009). Lexicology is not specific language, since it deals with universal features of words. Lexicography is more or less specific language in spite of its universal theoretical background. Lexicography has no other relevance except for its practical applicability. Lexicology is more theory oriented, lexicography is more concrete in application of theories. In a certain sense, lexicography may be considered a superior discipline to lexicology, for results are more important than intentions and the value of theoretical principles must be estimated according to results (Doroszewski, 1973). Lexicology usually covers a wide range of interests and approaches to lexical study. It includes reconstruction of meaning and semantic change of words, lexical variation and change across time scale, evolution of vocabulary over centuries, neologism and word-loss within languages, lexical borrowing and derivation over time, structural and etymological analysis of lexical items, etc. with close interface between semantics, syntax, and pragmatics (Vera, 2002). Lexicography, on the other hand, serves simply as a store house of information. In order to perform this task adequately, it collects information from different sources and presents them within the scope of dictionary users (Sekhar, 2009). Summing up, lexicology and lexicography are linguistic disciplines which are closely related. Both of them study the words and lexical units of a language but from a different approach. Since lexicology focuses on the various aspects of the vocabulary at a certain point in time, it cannot be studied isolated from other fields. Lexicography, however, deals with individual words with respect to their meaning and usage.. 28.

(38) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. 1.5 Corpus linguistics Corpus linguistics is a method of carrying out linguistic analyses on the basis of computerized corpora. Usually, the analysis is performed with the help of the computer; i.e., with specialized software, and takes into account the frequency of the phenomena investigated (Nesselhau, 2005). In his article “Applying corpus methods to writing research”, Ute Römer (2010) states that corpus linguistics has started to turn from a pure methodology into a fully-fledged discipline during the last decades. It can assist the researcher to assess and describe a linguistic phenomenon in a maximally objective and hence largely theory-neutral fashion. It is fundamentally incompatible only with linguistic frameworks in which theoretical assumptions and hypotheses guide the analysis (Römer & Wulff, 2010). In relation to the importance of corpus linguistics, Orr (2006) notes: “Corpus linguistics has much to offer in the field of professional communication, for it allows researchers to study spoken or written discourse in considerable detail, which can yield information about language structure or use that is normally beyond the grasp of intuition and personal experience. By carefully designing corpora that are representative of language as it is actually being used today (or was used in the past) and then analyzing the data with proper methods and technologies, researchers can better understand a rather wide variety of things that might be of use to professional communicators as well as to those who support them” (Orr, 2006). The principles of corpus linguistics have been around for almost a century. Lexicographers, or dictionary makers, have been collecting examples of language in use to help accurately define words since at least the late 19th century. Before computers, these small examples of language were essentially collected on small slips of paper and organized in pigeon holes. The advent of computer led to the creation of what we consider to be modern-day corpora. The first computer-based corpus, the Brown corpus, was created in 1961 and comprised about 1 million words. Today, generalized corpora are hundreds of millions of words in size, and. 29.

(39) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. corpus linguistics is making outstanding contributions to the fields of second language research and teaching (Bennett, 2010). Bennett claims that many notable scholars have contributed to the development of modern-day corpus linguistics such as Leech, Biber, Johanson, Francis, Hunston, Conrad and McCarthy, to name just a few. These scholars have made substantial contributions to corpus linguistics, both past and present. Many corpus linguists, however, consider John Sinclair to be one of, if not the most, influential scholar of modern-day corpus linguistics. Sinclair detected that a word in and of itself does not carry meaning, but that meaning is often made through several words in a sequence (Sinclair, 1991). This is the idea that forms the backbone of corpus linguistics (Bennett, 2010). A common belief is that corpus-based linguistics was virtually abandoned in the 1950´s and then rediscovered, as if by accident, in the early 1980´s. This is most certainly not the case. Pioneers worked on with corpus data throughout the 50´s, 60´s and 70´s, and it is largely through their efforts that corpus work revived. So we must not think in terms of corpus work being simply set aside in the late 1950´s- to do so would be to miss out on vital developments in the field which occurred when the methodology was truly marginalized (MacEnery & Wilson, 1996). There has always been a debate whether or not corpus linguistics can be considered a branch of linguistics. The answer to this question is both yes and no. Corpus linguistics is not a branch of linguistics in the same sense as syntax, semantics, sociolinguistics and so on. All of these principles concentrate on describing/explaining some aspect of language use. Corpus linguistics, in contrast, is a methodology rather than an aspect of language requiring explanation or description. A corpus-based approach can be taken to many aspects of linguistic enquiry. Syntax, semantics and pragmatics are just three examples of areas of linguistic enquiry that have used a corpus-based approach. Corpus linguistics is a methodology that may be used in almost any area of linguistics, but does not truly delimit an area of linguistics itself (MacEnery & Wilson, 1996). 30.

(40) CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. MacEnery also states that corpus linguistics does allow us to differentiate between approaches taken to the study of language and, in that respect, it does define an area of linguistics or, at least, a series of areas of linguistics. Hence we find corpus-based syntax as opposed to non-corpus-based syntax, corpus-based semantics as opposed to non-corpus-based semantics and so on. So, while corpus linguistics is not an area of linguistic enquiry itself, it does, at least, allow us to discriminate between methodological approaches taken to the same area of enquiry by different groups, individuals or studies (MacEnery & Wilson, 1996). During the 1950´s a series of criticisms were made of the corpus-based approach to language study. Some were right, some were half-right and some have proved themselves, with the passage of time, to be wrong or irrelevant. The first important point is that these criticisms were not necessarily fatal ones, though they were widely perceived as such at the time. The second most important point is that some linguists carried on using the corpus as a technique and tried to establish a balance between the use of corpus and the use of intuition (MacEnery & Wilson, 1996). Although the methodology went through a period of relative neglect for two decades, it was far from being abandoned. Indeed, during this time essential advances in the use of corpora were made. Most importantly of all, the linking of the corpus to the computer was completed. Following these advances, corpus studies boomed from 1980 onwards, as corpora, techniques and new arguments in favor of the use of corpora became more apparent. Currently this boom continues and both of the “schools” of corpus linguistics are growing, with work being carried out in the Survey of English Usage (SEU) and neo-Firthian traditions worldwide. Corpus linguistics is maturing methodologically and the range of languages addressed by corpus linguists is growing annually (MacEnery & Wilson, 1996). In the field of translation it was Mona Baker who pioneered the corpusbased trend in the early 90s. She started collecting corpora of translated texts with. a. view. to. uncovering. the. distinctive patterns. of. translation.. Her. investigations brought to light a number of potential ‘translation universals’ 31.