Cover not available
Part of
Dynamics and Terminology: An interdisciplinary perspective on monolingual and multilingual culture-bound communication
Edited by Rita Temmerman and Marc Van Campenhoudt
[Terminology and Lexicography Research and Practice 16] 2014
► pp. 61–78

3. The harmonization of legal cultures, concepts and terms

Depth of harmonization and research design

| NHH - Norwegian School of Economics
The present chapter discusses how the scope and depth of harmonization between supranational and national legislation are decisive for the choice of empirical basis for contrastive studies of legal concepts and terms used in national legislations. The case studies presented in this chapter aim at illustrating two possible approaches. The first case study explores differences between the French and Norwegian transpositions of the EU directive on public procurement. The second discusses the use of preparatory works as a source of information on the formation of legal concepts and terms, exemplified with the French preparatory works for the new law on bioethics of 2011 and the Norwegian whitepaper issued in advance of the Children’s Act of 2009.
Published online: 3 December 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tlrp.16.04whi
References
Brand, Oliver
2009 “Language as a Barrier to Comparative Law.” In Translation issues in Language and Law, ed. by Frances Olsen, Alexander Lorz, and Dieter Stein, 18–33. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Brouard, Sylvain, Olivier Costa, and Eric Kerrouche
2012 “Are French Laws Written in Brussels? The Limited Europeanization of French laws and its Implications.” In The Europeanization of Domestic Legislatures: The Empirical Implications of the Delors Myth in Nine Countries, ed. by Sylvain Brouard, Olivier Costa, and Thomas König, 75–95. New York, Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dury, Pascaline
2012 “Le sentiment d’un “besoin néologique” chez les experts pour remplacer un terme à connotation péjorative: quelques exemples tirés du domaine médical.” Neologica 6: 81–94.Google Scholar
Cornu, Gérard
2007 Vocabulaire juridique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Lemmens, Koen
2011 “The Slow Dynamics of Legal Language. Festina Lente?” Terminology 17 (1): 74–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mattila, Heikki
2006 Comparative Legal Linguistics. Aldershof: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
Roald, Jan, and Sunniva Whittaker
2010 “Verbalization in French and Norwegian Legislative Texts: A Contrastive Case Study.” In Legal Discourse across Languages and Cultures, ed. by Maurizio Gotti, and Christopher Williams, 95–108. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2012 “Om dannelsen av juridisk terminology: fra kaos til lovregulering.” Nordterm 17: 115–122.Google Scholar
2013 “A la recherche de néologismes juridiques norvégiens et français: Discussion méthodologique. ” Arena Romanistica 13: 296–310.Google Scholar
Sunde, Jørn Øyrehagen
2010 “Champagne at the Funeral.” In Rendezvous of Legal Cultures, ed. by Jørn Øyrehagen Sunde, and Knut Einar Skodvin, 11–28. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
Temmerman, Rita
2000 Towards New Ways of Terminology Description. The Sociocognitive Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Picton, Aurélie
2014. 8. The dynamics of terminology in short-term diachrony. In Dynamics and Terminology [Terminology and Lexicography Research and Practice, 16], ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo
Tabares Plasencia, Encarnación & Carsten Sinner
2023. La diversidad terminológica dentro del mismo ordenamiento jurídico como problema de traducción: el subdominio jurídico de las parejas de hecho en España. Lebende Sprachen 0:0 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 november 2023. 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.