Chapter published in:
Observing Eurolects: Corpus analysis of linguistic variation in EU law
Edited by Laura Mori
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 86] 2018
► pp. 296–327

Chapter 12
Observing Eurolects

The case of Polish

The chapter explores the Polish Eurolect, the largest Slavonic language in the EU. In respect of EU-rooted phenomena, the Polish Eurolect shows a high frequency of semantic Europeisms and a low overlap of lexical bundles. As regards contact-induced features, the Eurolect is subject to strong interference from EU English in the form of borrowings and calques, including punctuation, capitalisation, morphology, lexis and structure. Another type of contact-induced features are differences in the distribution of linguistic features that are triggered or suppressed as a result of contact. Intra-linguistic variation is also strongly demonstrated as register mixing. Hybrid phenomena are significantly more intense in the early phase and are reduced later due to the institutionalisation of translation process.
Keywords: Polish, Slavonic languages, interference, textual fit, borrowings, Europeisms, variation
Article outline
  • 1.Polish as an official language of the European Union
  • 2.The emergence of the Polish Eurolect: Phases of development
  • 3.Previous research into the Polish Eurolect
  • 4.Material and method
  • 5.Analysis
    • 5.1EU-rooted phenomena
    • 5.2Contact-induced features
    • 5.3Intra-linguistic variability
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 06 December 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.86.12bie
References
Bańko, M.
(2009) Wykłady z polskiej fleksji. Warszawa: PWN.Google Scholar
Biber, D. & Barbieri, F.
(2007) Lexical bundles in university spoken and written registers. English for Specific Purposes, 26(3), 263–286.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biel, Ł.
(2014a) Lost in the Eurofog: The textual fit of translated law. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2014b) The textual fit of translated EU law: A corpus-based study of deontic modality. The Translator, 20(2), 332–355.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2014c) Phraseology in legal translation: A corpus-based analysis of textual mapping in EU law. In K. K. S. Le Cheng & A. Wagner (Eds.), The Ashgate handbook of legal translation (pp.177–192). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
(2015) Phraseological profiles of legislative genres: Complex prepositions as a special case of legal phrasemes in EU law and national law. FACHSPRACHE – International Journal of Specialized Communication, 37(3–4), 139–160.Google Scholar
(2016) Mixed corpus design for researching the Eurolect: A genre-based comparable-parallel corpus in the PL EUROLECT project. In E. Gruszczyńska & A. Leńko-Szymańska (Eds.), Polskojęzyczne korpusy równoległe. Polish-language Parallel Corpora (pp. 197–208). Warsaw: Instytut Lingwistyki Stosowanej. http://​rownolegle​.blog​.ils​.uw​.edu​.pl​/files​/2016​/03​/12​_Biel​.pdf (12 September 2016).
(2018) Lexical bundles in EU law: The impact of translation process on the patterning of legal language. In S. Goźdź-Roszkowski & G. Pontrandolfo (Eds.), Phraseology in legal and institutional settings. A corpus-based interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 11–26). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Caliendo, G.
(2004) EU language in cross-boundary communication. Textus, 17, 159–178.Google Scholar
Ciostek, A.
(2010) Terminologia unijna a język polski (zapożyczenia, neologizmy) – wyzwania dla tłumacza. Lingua Legis, 19, 20–27.Google Scholar
DGT, Departament Języka Polskiego
(2016) Vademecum tłumacza. Wskazówki redakcyjne dla tłumaczy, Version 14. http://​ec​.europa​.eu​/translation​/polish​/guidelines​/documents​/styleguide​_polish​_dgt​_pl​.pdf (16 November 2016).
Dubisz, S.
(2001) Język polski poza granicami kraju. In S. Dubisz & S. Gajda (Eds.), Polszczyzna XX wieku. Ewolucja i perspektywy rozwoju (pp. 199–210). Warszawa: Elipsa.Google Scholar
GUS, Główny Urząd Statystyczny
(2015) Struktura narodowo-etniczna, językowa i wyznaniowa ludności Polski. Narodowy Spis Powszechny Ludności i Mieszkań 2011. Warsaw: GUS. http://​stat​.gov​.pl​/download​/gfx​/portalinformacyjny​/pl​/defaultaktualnosci​/5670​/22​/1​/1​/struktura​_narodowo​-etniczna​.pdf (12 December 2016).
Jopek-Bosiacka, A.
(2006) Przekład prawny i sądowy. Warsaw: PWN.Google Scholar
Kjær, A. L.
(2000) On the structure of legal knowledge: The importance of knowing legal rules for understanding legal texts. In L. Lundquist & R. J. Jarvella (Eds.), Language, text, and knowledge. Mental models of expert communication (pp. 127–161). Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Koskinen, K.
(2000) Institutional illusions. Translating in the EU Commission. The Translator, 6(1), 49–65.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kurzon, D.
(1986) It is hereby performed… Explorations in legal speech acts (Pragmatics & Beyond, VII:6) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kłos, P., Matulewska, A., & Nowak-Korcz, P.
(2007) Translation problems in Polish language versions of EU directives regulating medicine and biology related issues. In P. Nowak & P. Nowakowski (Eds.), Język komunikacja informacja (Vol. 2, pp. 67–76). Poznań: Sorus.Google Scholar
Malinowski, A.
(2006) Polski język prawny. Wybrane zagadnienia. Warsaw: LexisNexis.Google Scholar
(2012) Polski tekst prawny. Opracowanie treściowe i redakcyjne (3rd ed.). Warsaw: LexisNexis.Google Scholar
Mason, I.
(2004[2003]) Text parameters in translation: Transitivity and institutional cultures. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The Translation Studies Reader (2nd ed., pp. 470–481). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mattila, H. E. S.
(2006) Comparative legal linguistics. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Mori, L.
(2018) Introduction. The Eurolect Observatory Project . In L. Mori (Ed.), Observing Eurolects. Corpus analysis of linguistic variation EU law (Studies in Corpus Linguistics 86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (this volume).Google Scholar
Newmark, P.
(1981) Approaches to translation. London: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Pozzo, B.
(2012) Multilingualism and the harmonization of European private law: Problems and perspectives. European Review of Private Law, 5/6, 1185–1198.Google Scholar
Rayson, P. & Garside, R.
(2000) Comparing corpora using frequency profiling. In Proceedings of the workshop on Comparing Corpora, held in conjunction with the 38th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2000), 1–8 October 2000, Hong Kong, (pp. 1–6). http://​ucrel​.lancs​.ac​.uk​/people​/paul​/publications​/rg​_acl2000​.pdf (4 December 2016).
Salmi-Tolonen, T.
(1994) The linguistic manifestations of primary and secondary functions of law in the national and supranational contexts. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 7(19), 13–39.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Šarčević, S.
(1997) New approach to legal translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
Shlesinger, M.
(1991) Lexicalization in translation: An empirical study of students’ progress. http://​www​.eric​.ed​.gov​/PDFS​/ED333752​.pdf (1 September 2016).
Stefaniak, K.
(2013) Multilingual legal drafting, translators’ choices and the principle of lesser evil. Meta. The Translators’ Journal, 58(1), 58–65.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Szczepankowska, I.
(2006) Problemy z tłumaczeniem na język polski tekstów oficjalnych (na materiale dokumentów opublikowanych w Dzienniku Urzędowym Unii Europejskiej). Poradnik Językowy, 7, 3–15.Google Scholar
Tirkkonen-Condit, S.
(2004) Unique items – Over- or under-represented in translated language? In A. Mauranen & P. Kujamäki (Eds.), Translation universals. Do they exist? (Benjamins Translation Library 48) (pp. 177–184). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Toury, G.
(1995) Descriptive translation studies and beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, E., Bech, S., & Martínez, J. M.
(2002) Translating for the European Union Institutions. Translation practices explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Waszakowa, K.
(2005) Przejawy internacjonalizacji w słowotwórstwie współczesnej polszczyzny. Warszawa: WUW.Google Scholar
Wronkowska, S. & Zieliński, M.
(2004) Komentarz do zasad techniki prawodawczej. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe.Google Scholar
Zieliński, M.
(2012) Wykładnia prawa. Zasady, reguły, wskazówki (6th ed.). Warsaw: LexisNexis.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 5 other publications

Biel, Łucja & Dariusz Koźbiał
2020. How do translators handle (near-) synonymous legal terms? A mixed-genre parallel corpus study into the variation of EU English-Polish competition law terminology. Estudios de Traducción 10 ► pp. 69 ff. Crossref logo
Manzella, Pietro
2021. Legal Effects of Language Issues in Workplace Discourse: Evidence from Australia’s Fairwork Commission. Lebende Sprachen 66:1 ► pp. 166 ff. Crossref logo
Mori, Laura
2018.  In Observing Eurolects [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 86], ► pp. 369 ff. Crossref logo
Mori, Laura & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi
2021. Mapping Eurolects. Languages in Contrast 21:2 ► pp. 186 ff. Crossref logo
Pontrandolfo, Gianluca
2021. National and EU judicial phraseology under the magnifying glass: a corpus-assisted analysis of complex prepositions in Spanish. Perspectives 29:2 ► pp. 260 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 01 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.