Comparative Legilinguistics
Not a member yet
428 research outputs found
Sort by
Mapping rhetorical dissent: a comparative analysis of the Obergefell opinions
No full textThis paper offers a rhetorical analysis of the four dissenting opinions in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that extended constitutional protection to same-sex marriage. Drawing on a ten-dimensional coding framework, the study investigates how Justices Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito construct their dissenting positions not only in legal terms but as distinctive rhetorical performances. The framework includes appeals (ethos, logos, pathos), tone/style, framing devices, intertextuality, figurative language, rhetorical questions, identity and community appeals, and lexical polarity). While united in outcome, the dissents diverge sharply in form, intent, and audience. Roberts adopts a tone of institutional mourning; Scalia mounts a caustic protest; Thomas articulates a doctrinal and philosophical minimalism; and Alito warns against the erosion of pluralism and conscience rights. The analysis shows that judicial dissent operates on multiple discursive levels, revealing divergent conceptions of law, democracy, and cultural identity. By focusing on dissent as a rhetorical genre, this paper contributes to broader debates about constitutional discourse, the function of dissenting opinions, and the interplay between law and persuasion in pluralistic societies.
The \u27language of the law\u27 and the \u27sentiment of the language\u27. A cultural challenge to enrich global English for comparative legal studies with national identities
No full textWith the spread of the language and law theory in comparative constitutional law scholarship, the hegemony of the English language has often been overestimated, to the detriment of national cultural and linguistic identities. The worldwide ramifications of this reality, and in particular the related compelling role of the global dimension of the English language (Global English), have not entirely prevented the highly valuable process of adapting English to local needs. However, this aspect is still under-explored if we consider two related issues that are quite challenging: the perspective of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), which emphasizes the relationship between language and power, and the open-ended meanings of the languages spoken within national jurisdictions that encompass a variety of domains, with their multiple versions, idioms, or ‘Englishes’ of the Outer or Expanding Circle. Trying to respond to the transitional challenge of the role of English language in the field of comparative law studies, this paper elaborates some practical methodological suggestions. They are meant to promote a more pluralistic, legal-linguistic understanding of comparative constitutional law to attain an updated legal literacy in teaching (Content and Language Integrated Learning – CLIL) and research (Sentiment Legal Analysis – SLA) in the era of new technologies. Outlining the framework for the rigorous practice of interdiscursivity, it thus pursues the following normative arguments: (i) Achieving a balance between a common global register and nuances of meaning related to local areas requires a methodological design that considers context, legal discourse, and an interdisciplinary approach; (ii) Using the expanded field of SLA in constitutional law contributes to an updated investigation on English as a Court language; (iii) Taking judicial language as a case study of English-language court discourse in continental systems encourages research into the subjectivity of idiomatic and cultural expressions relating to the national identity of judicial attitudes
Comparative study of legal terms in English and Uzbek languages with reference to international law and legal globalisation
No full textThis study presents a comparative analysis of English and Uzbek legal terminology within the framework of legal globalisation. Using a comparative method, it examines key terms drawn from international treaties and national legislation (e.g., “refugee”, “due diligence”, “jurisdiction”, “arbitration”), focusing on their adaptation and use in practice. The analysis highlights systemic differences: English terminology, shaped by common law and enriched with Latin borrowings, is concise and context-dependent, while Uzbek terminology, rooted in continental law, often relies on descriptive constructions and statutory rigidity. Three categories of terminological relationships are identified: direct equivalents (“arbitration” (арбитраж)), partial equivalents requiring cultural adaptation (“due diligence” (тегишли текширув)), and non-equivalent terms requiring explanatory translation (habeas corpus). Findings reveal that English increasingly influences Uzbek legal practice, but borrowing without contextualisation can lead to semantic distortion. The study also underscores the role of international organisations (e.g., UN, ICC) in promoting terminological standardisation. By documenting patterns of equivalence and divergence, this research provides both theoretical insights and practical implications for legal translators, comparative lawyers, and policymakers. It demonstrates that effective legal translation requires not only linguistic competence but also an understanding of distinct legal traditions and institutional frameworks
Das neue Gerichtsdolmetschergesetz – Änderungen in Qualifizierung und Beeidigung von Dolmetschern und Übersetzern in Deutschland
Full text linkAm 1. Januar 2023 ist in Deutschland das Gerichtsdolmetschergesetz in Kraft getreten. Es handelt sich um ein nationales Gesetz, welches die Beeidigung von Dolmetschern für gerichtliche Zwecke bundesweit einheitlich regeln sollte. Auf dieser Basis zur gleichen Zeit wurden 13 neue Übersetzer- und Dolmetschergesetze auf Landesebene verabschiedet, die mit ihren höheren Qualifikationsanforderungen und weiteren Vorschriften, die Auswirkungen auf die gesamte Branche der beeidigten Dolmetscher und Übersetzer mit sich bringen. Spätestens Ende 2027 werden die vor 2023 beeidigten Dolmetscher und Übersetzer ihren Status verlieren, weil sie die neuen Qualifikationsanforderungen nicht erfüllen. Das Gerichtsdolmetschergesetz 2023 und die daran angepassten Übersetzer- und Dolmetschergesetze hatten offenbar das Ziel einer einheitlichen Reglementierung der sprachmittelnden Berufe im Justizbereich. Dieses Zeil ist leider nur zum Teil erreicht. In diesen Beitrag wird eine Analyse der Vor- und Nachteile des neuen Gesetzes durchgeführt und daraus resultierende Änderungen für Übersetzer, Dolmetscher und Gerichte zusammengefasst.Am 1. Januar 2023 ist in Deutschland das Gerichtsdolmetschergesetz in Kraft getreten. Es handelt sich um ein nationales Gesetz, welches die Beeidigung von Dolmetschern für gerichtliche Zwecke bundesweit einheitlich regeln sollte. Auf dieser Basis zur gleichen Zeit wurden 13 neue Übersetzer- und Dolmetschergesetze auf Landesebene verabschiedet, die mit ihren höheren Qualifikationsanforderungen und weiteren Vorschriften, die Auswirkungen auf die gesamte Branche der beeidigten Dolmetscher und Übersetzer mit sich bringen. Spätestens Ende 2027 werden die vor 2023 beeidigten Dolmetscher und Übersetzer ihren Status verlieren, weil sie die neuen Qualifikationsanforderungen nicht erfüllen. Das Gerichtsdolmetschergesetz 2023 und die daran angepassten Übersetzer- und Dolmetschergesetze hatten offenbar das Ziel einer einheitlichen Reglementierung der sprachmittelnden Berufe im Justizbereich. Dieses Zeil ist leider nur zum Teil erreicht. In diesen Beitrag wird eine Analyse der Vor- und Nachteile des neuen Gesetzes durchgeführt und daraus resultierende Änderungen für Übersetzer, Dolmetscher und Gerichte zusammengefasst.On January 1, 2023, the Court Interpreters Act came into force in Germany. This is a national law intended to standardize the swearing-in of interpreters for judicial purposes across the country. At the same time, 13 new translator and interpreter laws were enacted at the state level, introducing higher qualification requirements and additional regulations that impact the entire profession of sworn interpreters and translators. By the end of 2027 at the latest, interpreters and translators who were sworn in before 2023 will lose their status if they do not meet the new qualification requirements. The 2023 Court Interpreters Act and the corresponding state-level translator and interpreter laws were apparently aimed at creating a uniform regulatory framework for language mediation professions in the judicial sector. However, this goal has only been partially achieved. This article provides an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the new law and summarizes the resulting changes for translators, interpreters, and courts
Didaktik der juristischen Übersetzung in einem Online-Kurs zur Vorbereitung auf die staatliche Prüfung zum beeidigten Übersetzer der deutschen Sprache
Full text linkFür Berufsanwärter[1] stellt die Übersetzung juristischer Texte eine erhebliche Herausforderung dar, da sie sowohl terminologische Kenntnisse als auch das Verständnis der Rechtssysteme beider Sprachgebiete erfordert. Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird eine Methode zur Vermittlung der Übersetzung juristischer Texte im Rahmen eines Online-Kurses zur Vorbereitung auf die staatliche Prüfung zum beeidigten Übersetzer für die deutsche Sprache dargestellt. Im theoretischen Teil wird der Ansatz zur Vermittlung der Übersetzung juristischer Texte in einem Online-Kurs detailliert erläutert. Das Ziel besteht darin, das notwendige Wissen und die erforderlichen Fähigkeiten zu vermitteln, um die Herausforderungen bei der Übersetzung juristischer Texte – einer der Textsorten, die in der staatlichen Prüfung übersetzt werden müssen – erfolgreich zu bewältigen. Im empirischen Teil werden die von angehenden Übersetzern[2] gemachten Übersetzungsfehler analysiert und ihre Ursachen ermittelt.
[1] Zwecks besserer Lesbarkeit wird bewusst auf das Gendern verzichtet und ausschließlich das generische Maskulinum verwendet.
[2] Die Bezeichnungen Berufsanwärter, angehende Übersetzer, Sprachmittler und Kursteilnehmer werden in diesem Beitrag synonym verwendet.For aspiring sworn translators, translating legal texts presents a considerable challenge as it requires both terminological knowledge and an understanding of the legal systems of both language areas. This article attempts to present a method for teaching the translation of legal texts within an online course designed to prepare candidates for the state exam for sworn translators of the German language. The theoretical part details the method of teaching the translation of legal texts in the online course, which aims to impart the knowledge and skills necessary to meet the challenges that arise when translating legal texts—one of the types of texts translated in the state exam. The empirical part analyzes examples of translation errors made by aspiring translators and attempts to identify their sources.Dla adeptów zawodu tłumacza przysięgłego tłumaczenie tekstów prawniczych stanowi nie lada wyzwanie, ponieważ wymaga znajomości zarówno terminologii, jak i zrozumienia systemów prawnych obu obszarów językowych. Artykuł stanowi próbę prezentacji sposobu nauczania przekładu tekstów prawniczych w ramach kursu online przygotowującego do egzaminu państwowego na tłumacza przysięgłego języka niemieckiego. W części teoretycznej szczegółowo omówiono sposób nauczania tłumaczenia tekstów prawniczych w kursie online, którego celem jest przekazanie wiedzy i umiejętności niezbędnych do sprostania wyzwaniom pojawiających się podczas tłumaczenia tekstów prawniczych – jednego z rodzaju tekstów tłumaczonych na egzaminie państwowym. W części empirycznej analizie poddano przykłady błędów tłumaczeniowych popełnianych przez adeptów zawodu oraz podjęto próbę wskazania ich źródeł
LES MAUX DU DROIT ET LES MOTS DE LA MÉDECINE : ENTRELACS SÉMANTIQUES ET TERMINOLOGIQUES, REFLETS DES DIALOGUES ÉPISTÉMIQUES
No full textLes termes anciens de la common law tels que remedy et case, les termes modernes de la formation des juristes comme Juris Doctor et « clinique juridique », et certains mouvements de la philosophie du droit tels que la therapeutic jurisprudence suggèrent des convergences entre droit et médecine quand d’autres termes évoquent plutôt des divergences, par exemple la différence entre « patient » et « client ». Cet essai s’appuie sur ces convergences et divergences terminologiques pour ouvrir des pistes d’exploration concernant les dialogues épistémiques entre droit et médecine à diverses époques. En examinant l’histoire des usages des termes, mais aussi les connotations et aspirations qu’ils véhiculent, l’auteur montre comment les mots apparemment innocents du quotidien révèlent des échanges foisonnants d’une discipline à l’autre.Les termes anciens de la common law tels que remedy et case, les termes modernes de la formation des juristes comme Juris Doctor et « clinique juridique », et certains mouvements de la philosophie du droit tels que la therapeutic jurisprudence suggèrent des convergences entre droit et médecine quand d’autres termes évoquent plutôt des divergences, par exemple la différence entre « patient » et « client ». Cet essai s’appuie sur ces convergences et divergences terminologiques pour ouvrir des pistes d’exploration concernant les dialogues épistémiques entre droit et médecine à diverses époques. En examinant l’histoire des usages des termes, mais aussi les connotations et aspirations qu’ils véhiculent, l’auteur montre comment les mots apparemment innocents du quotidien révèlent des échanges foisonnant d’une discipline à l’autre
A note on certain implications of clinical artificial intelligences for the field of medico-legal semiotics
No full textArtificial intelligence has profound implications for the filed of clinical practices, and also for semiotics and law. In this article, we articulate and explain the different types of Clinical artificial intelligence (CAIs) as their normativity often stems from their type (symbolic or connectionist) (Harnad, 1990), and relative autonomy/agency. Older, symbolic AI, while more explainable, did not offer the potential that offer the current, second generation CAIs. The intelligibility of the reasoning used by CAIs remains largely opaque and generally unintelligible and unexplainable for human interpreters, even sometimes counter-factual (Lee & Topol, 2024). This is also true of the most recent so-called “explainable” AIs, that remains imperfect and only very partially explainable (Reddy, 2022). The most recent literature reveals that the very question of AI explainability continues to be one of the most heavily debated concerning CAIs (Hildt, 2025). In this article, we will reveal that the solution to the black-box problem of CAIs resides in an investigation in the (bio)semiotic nature of both CAIs themselves, but also the problem that surround their explainability. We conclude with solutions to promote transparency in the use of CAIs
Etiamsi omnes, ego non: an exploratory study of argument types in separate opinions
No full textThe present paper explores the nature of argument types in separate opinions by analysing a corpus of ten judgments issued in English by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) between 2020 and 2024. The qualitative analysis primarily draws on the pragma-dialectical categorisation of argument schemes to investigate whether the separate opinions at issue reveal a predilection by ECtHR judges for symptomatic, comparison or causal arguments. The results suggest that the three argument types are invariably used, in that they enable ECtHR judges to shape the complex argumentative defence of their standpoints. Symptomatic arguments mostly occur as arguments from authority; comparison arguments are mainly harnessed to establish analogies with previous judgments; and pragmatic arguments are used primarily to warn against the detrimental legal consequences of the majority decisions. Although the latter occur less frequently, the three argument types all appear functional to enhancing the acceptability of contra-argumentation in separate opinions.Nel presente studio viene esplorata la natura delle tipologie di argomentazione nelle opinioni separate attraverso l’analisi di dieci sentenze emesse in inglese dalla Corte europea per i diritti dell’uomo tra il 2020 e il 2024. L’analisi qualitativa attinge prevalentemente alla categorizzazione pragma-dialettica degli schemi argomentativi per scoprire se le opinioni separate in questione rivelino una predilezione da parte dei giudici della Corte per l’argomentazione sintomatica, comparativa o causale. I risultati indicano che tutti e tre i tipi di argomentazione vengono ampiamente usati, poiché permettono ai giudici della Corte di plasmare la complessa difesa argomentativa delle proprie opinioni. L’argomentazione sintomatica si presenta prevalentemente sotto forma di argomentazione di autorità; l’argomentazione comparativa viene sfruttata soprattutto per istituire analogie con sentenze precedenti; e l’argomentazione pragmatica viene impiegata principalmente per sottolineare le deleterie conseguenze legali delle decisioni della maggioranza. Anche se quest’ultima tipologia si osserva meno di frequente, tutti e tre i tipi di argomentazione appaiono funzionali ad aumentare l’accettabilità della contro-argomentazione nelle opinioni separate
Linguistic aspects of concepts of law in Chinese legal discourse
No full textChinese concepts of law have been rarely approached from the legal-linguistic perspective. Systematic research into the Chinese law started with the analysis of the traditional concept of law in Chinese state and society. Scholarly interest in this perspective was mainly conditioned by the question whether the Chinese concept of law differs from Occidental conceptions. In terms of legal-linguistic research, the answer to this traditional question depends on the methodology used in scrutinizing legal Chinese, both in the diachronic and in the synchronic perspectives. This methodology is rooted in the analysis of the Chinese legal discourse. It indicates a complexity of concepts and related argumentative structures that was underestimated by the traditional research. Therefore, in this study the stages in the development of the discourse about Chinese concepts of law are elucidated to show their dependance upon the legal discourse in its different stages of social evolution. Nowadays, the traditional concept of law plays a limited role in the Chinese legal discourse. Today, Occidental conceptions of law dominate the legal landscape of the Chinese-speaking world. Therefore, the understanding of discursive fundamentals necessitates the integration of both research areas. Finally, the focus upon the language of law rather than the traditional concept may enable new insights into the nature of the discourse about the Chinese law. This study investigates the preconditions of such innovative insights