Description
Book SynopsisThis book is an in-depth study of EU judicial language and its impact on the language of national judges. It is the first comprehensive study of the judicial variety of the Polish Eurolect. The book applies the intertextual relation of textual fit and corpora of EU and Polish judgments to empirically measure the linguistic distance between translations and non-translations. It analyzes both the level of genre macrostructure and the microstructure (lexis and grammar, formulaicity, terminology). This interdisciplinary monograph explores a distinct European, translation-shaped variety of judicial language which departs from the conventions of judicial Polish. The volume is essential reading for researchers in legal linguistics, legal translation and genre analysis.
Table of ContentsTable of contents
List of tables
List of figures
Abbreviations and acronyms
Glossing abbreviations
Acknowledgments
Introduction
Part I. Theoretical background
Chapter 1. Multilingualism and translation at the Court of Justice of the European Union
1.1 Context of production of CJEU judgments: policy of multilingualism
1.2 The translation process
1.3 The translator profile: lawyer-linguists
Chapter 2. Approach to genre analysis
2.1 Genre, register, style, discourse (community), legal language — setting the scene for the analysis of judgments
2.2 A mixed genre-register approach to the linguistic profiling of judgments
Chapter 3. Corpus-linguistic methodology and the operationalization of textual fit
3.1 Corpus Linguistics as a methodology
3.1.1 Corpus-based and corpus-driven approaches to the study of language
3.1.2 Advantages and disadvantages of corpus methodology
3.2 Multi-perspective framework for analysis of judicial language
3.3 The relation of textual fit and its operationalization
Part II. Empirical study
Chapter 4. Design of the JURIDIC corpus
4.1 Corpus design
4.2 Structure of the individual sub-corpora
4.2.1 CJEU corpus
4.2.2 SN corpus
4.2.3 The National Corpus of Polish (NKJP)
4.3 Representativeness, balance and comparability of the sub-corpora
4.4 Software
4.5 Normalization of corpus data and statistical measures
Part II.A Macro level
Chapter 5. Contextual and macrostructural analysis of CJEU and SN judgments
5.1 Contextual analysis of CJEU and SN judgments
5.1.1 Situational characteristics
5.1.2 Discourse participants
5.1.3 Communicative purposes
5.1.4 Communicative conventions
5.2 Macrostructural analysis of CJEU and SN judgments
5.2.1 Macro- and microstructure of CJEU judgments
5.2.2 Macro- and microstructure of SN judgments
5.3 Conclusions
Part II.B. Micro level: Pillar I — Lexico-grammatical patterns
Chapter 6. Analysis of chosen lexico-grammatical patterns
6.1 Global comparison of corpora
6.2 Analysis of keyword lists: identification of lexico-grammatical categories for further analysis
6.3 Phraseological framing with prepositions
6.3.1 Prepositions as a word class
6.3.2 Distribution of simple prepositions
6.3.3 Distribution of top 50 compound and secondary prepositions
6.3.4 Grammaticalized discourse functions of compound and secondary prepositions
6.3.4.1 Time
6.3.4.2 Cause-effect, result, contravention and condition
6.3.4.3 Reference
6.4.4.4 Intra- and inter-textual reference
6.3.4.5 Participation
6.3.4.6 Modality
6.3.4.7 Apposition
6.3.4.8 Manner and instrumental relations
6.3.4.9 Adversariality
6.3.4.10 Measure
6.3.4.11 Inclusivity/exclusivity
6.3.4.12 Commutative relations
6.3.4.13 Purpose
6.3.4.14 Distribution
6.3.4.15 Comparison
6.3.4.16 Space relations
6.3.4.17 Partitive relations
6.3.4.18 Active relations
6.3.5 Prepositions in judgments – summary
6.4 Structurization of judicial arguments
6.4.1 Parataxis
6.4.2 Hypotaxis
6.5 Deixis
6.6 Depersonalization
6.6.1 Auxiliary verbs
6.6.2 Passive voice
6.6.3 The siê impersonal pattern
6.6.4 The –no/to impersonal pattern
6.7 Legal reasoning and argumentation
6.7.1 Verdictive, exercitive (argumentative) and reporting verbs
6.7.2 Causal patterns
6.7.3 If-then conditionals and related patterns
6.7.4 Patterns of purpose
6.8 Framing with adverbials and participles
6.8.1 Adverbials
6.8.2 Participles
Part II.C. Micro level: Pillar II — Formulaicity
Chapter 7. Lexical bundles
7.1. Lexical bundles in the frequency-based (distributional) approach to phraseology
7.2. Related studies and research questions
7.3. Research material and methodology
7.4. Overall distribution of 2–8–grams in judicial language
7.5. Refinement of 3–4–grams
7.5.1 Thematic classification into content and non-content bundles
7.5.2 Overlap of 3– and 4–grams in the translation and non-translation corpora
7.6. Functional classification of lexical bundles
7.6.1 Referential bundles
7.6.1.1 Agents/institutions
7.6.1.2 Bundles denoting abstract concepts
7.6.1.3 Bundles denoting documents
7.6.1.4 Legal procedure bundles
7.6.1.5 Dates
7.6.1.6 Places
7.6.2 Discourse-organizing bundles
7.6.2.1 Intra-/Intertextual bundles
7.6.2.2 Causative-resultative and inferential bundles
7.6.2.3 Focus bundles
7.6.2.4 Framing bundles
7.6.2.5 Topic elaboration/clarification bundles
7.6.2.6 Transition bundles
7.6.2.7 Purpose bundles
7.6.2.8 Conditional bundles
7.6.3 Stance bundles
7.6.3.1 Evaluative bundles
7.6.3.2 Epistemic stance bundles
7.7 Conclusions and implications for the future
Chapter 8. Binomials
8.1 Research material and methodology
8.2 Binomials and multinomials
8.2.1 Distribution of non-extended binomials
8.2.2 Structural and semantic qualities of non-extended binomials
8.2.3 Distribution of extended binomials
8.2.4 Structural and semantic qualities of extended binomials
8.2.5 Distribution and structural qualities of multinomials
8.2.6 Functional typology of binomials
8.3 Conclusions
Part II.D. Micro level: Pillar III —Terminology
Chapter 9. Terms in the common conceptual base of EU and national judgments
9.1 Key (EU and national) terminology-related terms
9.2 Methodological approach and research material
9.3 Global distribution and overlap of simple terms and complex terms
9.4 Top 30 simple terms and top 15 complex terms
9.5 Conceptual classification of node terms
9.5.1 Agentive and institutional node terms and their environment
9.5.2 Node terms related to substantive law and case-law and their environment
9.5.3 Legal procedure node terms and their environment
9.6 Conclusions
Chapter 10. Latinisms
10.1 Research material and methodology
10.2 Distribution of Latinisms in the corpora
10.3 Overlap of Latinisms between the corpora
10.4 Repertoire of key Latinisms in the genre of judgments
10.5 Degrees of textual integration and discourse functions of Latinisms
10.6 Conclusions
Chapter 11. Synthesis and conclusions
11.1 Divergence of translated EU judgments from non-translated Polish judgments, internal variation within the Eurolect, and judicial Polish against general Polish
11.1.1 Pillar I – Divergence at the lexico-grammatical level: CJ and GC vs SN_2011–2015, CJ vs GC, SN_2011–2015 vs NKJP
11.1.2 Pillar II – Divergence at the phraseological level: CJ and GC vs SN_2011–2015, CJ vs GC
11.1.3 Pillar III – Divergence at the terminological level: CJ and GC vs SN_2011–2015, CJ vs GC
11.1.4 Possible causes of divergence and acceptability of translated language
11.2 The limited impact of translated EU judgments on national judgments (microdiachronic language change) – 1999 vs 2011–2015
11.2.1 Pillar I – Microdiachronic change at the level of chosen lexico-grammatical features
11.2.2 Pillar II – Microdiachronic change at the phraseological level
11.2.3 Pillar III – Microdiachronic change at the terminological level
11.3 Limitations of the study and suggestions for further research
11.4 Practical applications of the study
Bibliography
Index
