New Insights into the Semantics of Legal Concepts and the Legal Dictionary

| University of Rijeka
HardboundAvailable
ISBN 9789027223418 | EUR 90.00 | USD 135.00
 
e-Book
ISBN 9789027266002 | EUR 90.00 | USD 135.00
 
This book focuses on legal concepts from the dual perspective of law and terminology. While legal concepts frame legal knowledge and take center stage in law, the discipline of terminology has traditionally been about concept description. Exploring topics common to both disciplines such as meaning, conceptualization and specialized knowledge transfer, the book gives a state-of-the-art account of legal interpretation, legal translation and legal lexicography with special emphasis on EU law. The special give-and-take of law and terminology is illuminated by real-life legal cases which demystify the ways courts do things with concepts. This original approach to the semantics of legal concepts is then incorporated into the making of a legal dictionary, thus filling a gap in the theory and practice of legal lexicography. With its rich repertoire of examples of legal terms in different languages, the book provides a blend of theory and practice, making it a valuable resource not only for scholars of law, language and lexicography but also for legal translators and students.
Publishing status: Available
Table of Contents
List of figures
ix
List of tables
x
List of abbreviations
xi
Introduction
1–6
Terms, concepts and other conundrums
7–25
Investigating legal concepts, language and the law
27–59
(How) Do courts do things with words?
61–78
Understanding EU legal concepts
79–89
Multilingualism and EU legal concepts
91–106
EU legal translation and challenges for the dictionary: Incorporating legal translation into dictionary making
107–135
Multilingual legal dictionaries: Towards a termontontological dictionary of EU law
137–168
Methodology for the making of a termontological dictionary
169–196
Concluding remarks and directions for future research
197–200
Bibliography
201–213
Appendix 1
215–217
Appendix 2
219
Subject index
221–222
“The manuscript is an important contribution to the field of Legal Linguistics with its emphasis upon combining a cognitive-conceptual approach to translation with similar approaches to terminology and lexicography. It is innovative in departing from recent functional approaches and investigating ways of doing cognitively oriented terminology and lexicography in the field of EU. Reading the book gives you access to the most recent state of the art of linguistics and translation in the field of multilingual law.”
“Focusing on the conceptualization of legal knowledge, this book opens new horizons in legal lexicography by proposing a model for a multilingual termontological dictionary of EU law based on innovative methods of cognitive terminography and backed by case law. Taking interdisciplinarity to a higher level, it is recommended reading for all linguists and lawyers interested in legal translation, legal lexicography and legal communication across borders.”
“With its simultaneous commitments to autonomy, multilingualism and open-textured concepts, EU law confronts the legal lexicographer with seemingly insurmountable challenges. Drawing strategically on advances in cognitive linguistics, Martina Bajčić meets these challenges in creating an approach she dubs cognitive terminography. Her contribution to the field is important and will be long-lasting.”
References

Bibliography

Terminology studies, legal terminology, lexicography, legal dictionaries

Atkins, B.T. Sue and Micheal Rundell
2008The Oxford Guide to Practical Lexicography. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bajčić, Martina
2010 “Challenges of Translating EU Terminology.” In Legal Discourse across Languages and Cultures, ed. by Maurizio Gotti and Christopher Williams, 75–95. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2011 “Conceptualization of Legal Terms in Different Fields of Law: The Need for a Transparent Terminological Approach.” In Research in Language, 9: 1, ed. by Stanislaw Goźdź-Roszkowski and Iwona Witczak-Plisiecka, 81–93. Warsaw: Versita.Google Scholar
2014Teorijski model izradbe višejezičnih terminoloških rječnika. Zagreb: Sveučilište u Zagrebu.Google Scholar
Béjoint, Henri
2010The Lexicography of English. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bergenholtz, Henning and Burkhard Schaeder
1994 “Vorwort.” In Fachlexikographie. Fachwissen und seine Repräsentation in Wörterbüchern, ed. by Henning Bergenholtz and Burkhard Schaeder, 1–11. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Bergenholtz, Henning and Tarp, Sven
1995Manual of Specialized Lexicography. Amsterdam/Philadephia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biel, Łucja
2008Legal terminology in translation practice: dictionaries, googling or discussion forums. SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation, 3/1.Google Scholar
Bowker, Lynne and Jennifer Pearson
2002Working with Specialized Language. A Practical Guide to Using Corpora. London/New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Budin, Gerhard
2001A critical evaluation of the state-of-the-art of terminology theory. ITTF Journal 12 (1–2). 7–23.Google Scholar
Bratanić, Maja and Ana Ostroški Anić
2013 “The Croatian national termbank STRUNA: A new platform for terminological work.” In Collegium antropologicum 37(3): 677–83.Google Scholar
Cabré, Maria Teresa
2003 “Theories of terminology. Their description, prescription and explanation.” In Terminology 9 (2), Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 163–200.Google Scholar
1999Terminology. Theory, Methods and Applications. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chromá, Marta
2004Legal Translation and the Dictionary. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
De Baer, Peter, Koen Kerremans and Rita Temmerman
2006Bridging Communication Gaps between Legal Experts in Multilingual Europe: Discussion of a Tool for Exploring Terminological and Legal Knowledge Resources. In Proceedings of the XII Euralex International Congress, ed. by Corino, E., Marello, C. and C. Onesti 6–9 September, Turin, Italy. 813–818.Google Scholar
De Groot, Gerard-René and Conrad J. P. van Laer
2011Bilingual and Multilingual Legal Dictionaries in the European Union: An Updated Bibliography, Legal Reference Services Quarterly, 30: 3. 149–209. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Faber Benítez, Pamela
2009The cognitive shift in terminology and specialized translation. MonTI. Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación 2009: 1. 107–134. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Faber, Pamela
(ed.) 2012A Cognitive Linguistic View of Terminology and Specialized Language. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Faber, Pamela, and Clara Inés López Rodrĭguez
2012Terminology and specialized language. In A Cognitive Linguistics View of Terminology and Specialized Language, ed. by Pamela Faber, 9–33. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Faber, Pamela
2011The dynamics of specialized knowledge representation: Simulational reconstruction or the perception-action interface, Terminology, 17: 1. 9–29 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. and Sue B. T. Atkins
1994 “Starting where dictionaries stop: the challenge of corpus lexicography.” In Computational Approaches to the Lexicon, ed. by Sue B.T. Atkins and Antonio Zampolli, 349–393. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gaudin, François
2003Socioterminologie: une Approche Sociolinguistique de la Terminologie. Brussels: Duculot.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk
2007Lexicography. In The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics ed. by Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Cuyckens, 1160–1174. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heid, Ulrich
1997Zur Strukturierung von einsprachigen und kontrastiven elektronischen Wörterbüchern. Tübingen: May Niemeyer Verlag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kerremans, Koen
2004Categorisation frameworks in termontography. Journal Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series-Themes in Translation Studies.Google Scholar
Kerremans, Koen and Rita Temmerman
2004Towards Multilingual, Termontological Support in Ontology Engineering in: Proceeding of Termino 2004. Université de Lyon, Lyon. Available at: http://​www​.academia​.edu​/851011​/Towards​_multilingual​_termontological​_support​_in​_ontology​_engineering (accessed 1 December 2014).
Lancashire, Ian and Janet Damianopouluos
2014 “The Early Modern English Law Lexicon.” In Legal Lexicography: A Comparative Perspective, ed. by Martin Mac Aodha 45–59. Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
León Araúz, Pilar, Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero Martínez
2012Specialized Language Semantics. In A Cognitive Linguistics View of Terminology and Specialized Language, ed. by Pamela Faber, 95–117. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
L’Homme, Marie-Claude and Monique C. Cormier
2014Dictionaries and the Digital revolution: A Focus on Users and Lexical Databases. International Journal of Lexicography 2014/doi: Crossref.Google Scholar
Martin, Willy and Hennie van der Vliet
2003 “Design and production of terminological dictionaries.” In A Practical Guide to Lexicography, ed. by Piet van Sterkenburg, 333–350. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, Ingrid, Lynne Bowker and Karen Eck
1992COGNITERM: An experiment in building a knowledge-based term bank. In Proceedings of the Fifth EURALEX International Congress. Tampere, Finnland. 159–172.Google Scholar
Najera Villar, Blanca and Diana Brändle
2012There Is No Knowledge without Terminology: Key Factors for Organisational Learning. Systems, Software and Services Process Improvement Communications in Computer and Information Science Volume 301 2012 300–309. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Peruzzo, Katia
2014Capturing dynamism in legal terminology: the case of victims of crime. In Dynamics and Terminology. An interdisciplinary perspective on monolingual and multilingual culture-bound communication, ed. by Rita Temmerman and Marc van Campenhoudt. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 43–59.Google Scholar
Picht, Heribert and Klaus-Dirk Schmitz
2001Terminologie und Wissensordnung. Ausgewählte Schriften aus dem Gesamtwerk von Eugen Wüster. Wien: TermNet.Google Scholar
Sager, Juan C.
1994Language Engineering and Translation: Consequences of Automation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sandrini, Peter
1996Terminologiearbeit im Recht. Vienna: International Network for Terminology.Google Scholar
2014 “Multinational Legal Terminology in a Paper Dictionary?” in Legal Lexicography. A Comparative Perspective ed. by Máirtín Mac Adoha. Surrey: Ashgate. p. 141–153.Google Scholar
Smith, Lionel
2014 Foreword to Legal Lexicography. A Comparative Perspective ed. by Máirtín Mac Adoha. Surrey: Ashgate. p. IX.Google Scholar
Szemińska, Weronika
2011 “Translating Law into a Dictionary. A Terminographic Model.” In Research in Language, 9: 1, ed. by Stanislaw Goźdź-Roszkowski and Iwona Witczak-Plisiecka, 177–186. Warsaw: Versita.Google Scholar
Tarp, Sven
2009Reflections on data access in lexicographic works. In Lexicography in the 21st Century, ed. by Sandro Nielsen and Sven Tarp, 43–63. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Temmerman, Rita
2000Towards New Ways of Terminology Description: The Sociocognitive Approach. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Temmerman, Rita and Koen Kerremans
2003Termontography: Ontology Building and the Sociocognitive Approach to Terminology Description. Prague CIL17 Conference. Available at: http://​www​.hf​.uib​.no​/forskerskole​/temmerman​_art​_prague03​.pdf (accessed 9 August 2011).
2005What will be considered a term? From static terminology description to dynamic terminology processing. Proceedings of the LSP conference, Bergamo. 265–277.Google Scholar
Tiscornia, Daniela
2007 “The LOIS Project: Lexical Ontologies for Legal Information Sharing.” In Proceedings of the V Legislative XML Workshop, ed. by Carlo Biagioli, Enrico Francesconi, and Giovanni Sartor, 189–204. Florence: European Press Academic Publishing.Google Scholar
Van Laer, Conrad J. P. and Tom van Laer
2007The Shortage of Legal Dictionaries Translating European Languages. Terminology 13: 1, 85–92. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, Sue Ellen and Budin, Gerhard
1997Handbook of Terminology Management. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wüster, Eugen
1968The Machine Tool, an Interlingual Dictionary of Basic Concepts. London: Technical Press.Google Scholar
1974 “Die allgemeine Termniologielehre – Ein Grenzgebiet zwischen Sprachwissenschaft, Logik, Ontologie, Informatik und den Sachwissenschaften.” Linguistics 119: 61–106.Google Scholar
1985Einführung in die allgemeine Terminologielehre und terminologische Lexikographie. Kopenhagen: Infoterm.Google Scholar

Linguistics, specialized language, legal language

Ajani, Gianmaria, Guido Boella, Leonardo Lesno, Marco Martin, Alessandro Mazzei, Daniele P. Radicioni and Piercarlo Rossi
2010Multilevel Legal Ontologies. In Semantic Processing of Legal Texts: Where the Language of Law Meets the Law of Language. ed. by Enrico Francesconi, Simonetta Montemagni, Wim Peters and Daniela Tiscornia. LNCS 6036. Berlin: Springer. 136–156. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Araúz, León Pillar, Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero Martínez
2012 “Specialized Language Semantics.” In A Cognitive Linguistics View of Terminology and Specialized Language, ed. by Pamela Faber, 95–177. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Arntz, Reiner and Peter Sandrini
2007Präzision versus Vagheit: Das Dilemma der Rechtssprache im Lichte von Rechtsvergleich und Sprachvergleich. In Indeterminacy in Terminology and LSP ed. by Bassey Edem Antia. Amsterdam/Philadephia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 135–157. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Austin, J. L.
1956A Plea for Excuses. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 1, 8.Google Scholar
Beveridge, Barbara J.
2002 “Legal English – How It Developed and Why It Is Not Appropriate for International Commercial Contracts.” In The Development of Legal Language, ed. by Heikki E. S. Mattila, 55–81. Helsinki: Kauppakaari.Google Scholar
Bowers, Frederick
1989Linguistic Aspects of Legislative Expression. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
Bukovčan, Dragica
2010Od teorije do prakse u jeziku struke. Zagreb: Školska knjiga.Google Scholar
Busse, Dietrich
2001Semantik der Praktiker. In Neue Studien zur Rechtlinguistik ed. by Friedrich Müller and Rainer Wimmer. Berlin: Duncker & Humboldt. P. 49, 45–81.Google Scholar
Charrow, Veda, Crandall, Jo Ann and Robert Charrow
1982Characteristics and Functions of Legal Language. In Kittredge, Richard and John Lehrberger (eds.) Sublanguage. Studies of Language in Restricted Semantic Domains. 175–191.Google Scholar
Croft, William and D. Alan Cruse
2004Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Endicott, Timothy A.O.
2001Vagueness in Law. UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cornu, Gérard
2000Linguistique juridique. Paris: Éditions Montchrestien.Google Scholar
Engberg, Jan
2004Statutory Texts as Instances of Language(s): Consequences and Limitations on Interpretation. 29 Brook. J. Int’l L. 1135 2003–2004. Available at: http://​heinonline​.org​/HOL​/LandingPage​?collection​=journals​&handle​=hein​.journals​/bjil29​&div​=33​&id​=&page= (accessed 1.06.2011).
2015 “Autonomous EU Concepts: Fact or Fiction?” In Language and Culture in EU Law: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, ed. by Susan Šarčević, 169–183. Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
2016 “Word Meaning and a Globalized Legal Order.” In The Oxford Handbook of Language and the Law, ed. by Lawrence M. Solan and Peter M. Tiersma, 175–187. UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Faber, Pamela and José Manuel Ureña Gómez-Moreno
2012 “Specialized Language Translation.” In A cognitive linguistics view of terminology and specialized language, ed. by Pamela Faber. 20: 73–92. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J.
1975An Alternative to the Checklist Theories of Meaning. Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (1975) p. 123–131.Google Scholar
2006Frame Semantics. In Cognitive Linguistics: Basic Readings. ed. by Dirk Geeraerts. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH&Co. KG. 373–401. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frade, Celine
2005 “Legal Multinominals: Recovering Possible Meanings from Vague Texts.” In Vagueness in Normative Texts ed. by Vijah K. Bhatia et al., 133–157. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk
2010Theories of Lexical Semantics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goddard, Cliff
2008 “Contrastive semantics and cultural psychology: English heart vs. Malay hati.” In Culture, Body and Language. Conceptualizations of internal Body Organs across Cultures and Languages. ed. by F. Sharifian, R. Dirven, N. Yu and S. Niemeier, 75–103. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hotta, Syûgo and Masahiro Fujita
2016 “The Psycholinguistic Basis of Distinctiveness in Trademark Law.” In The Oxford Handbook of Language and the Law ed. by Lawrence M. Solan and Peter M. Tiersma, 478–489. UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Humboldt, Wilhelm von
1963Schriften zur Sprachphilosophie. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray
2011Conceptual Semantics. In Semantics. An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning. ed. by Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger and Paul Portner. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton. Vol. 1. 688–709.Google Scholar
Kjær, Anne-Liese
2008 “Introduction: Language as Barrier and Carrier of European Legal Integration.” In Paradoxes of European Legal Integration, ed. by Hanne Petersen, Anne Lise Kjær, Helle Krunke and Mikael Rask Madsen, 149–157. Great Britain: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Koch, Hans-Joachim
1979Unbestimmte Rechtsbegriffe und Ermessensermächtigungen im Verwaltungsrecht. Eine logische und semantische Studie zur Gesetzesbindung der Verwaltung. Frankfurt am Main: Alfred Metzner Verlag.Google Scholar
Kocourek, Rostislav
1982La langue française de la technique et de la science. Wiesbaden: Brandstetter.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George
1987Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krois-Lidner, Amy
2009International Legal English. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W.
1987Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Volume I. Stanford CA: Stanford Univesity Press.Google Scholar
Macdonald, Roderick A.
1997Legal Bilingualism 1997 McGill Law Journal 42. 119–167.Google Scholar
Marder, Nancy. S.
2016 “Instructing the Jury.” In The Oxford Handbook of Language and the Law ed. by Lawrence M. Solan and Peter M. Tiersma, 435–445. UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mattila, Heikki E.S.
2006Comparative Legal Linguistics. Great Britain: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Mellinkoff, David
1963The Language of the Law. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
Müller, Friedrich
2001 “Textarbeit, Rechtsarbeit. Zur Frage der Linguistik in der Strukturierenden Rechtslehre.” In Neue Studien zur Rechtlinguistik, ed. by Friedrich Müller and Rainer Wimmer, 11–25. Berlin: Duncker & Humboldt.Google Scholar
Petersen, Hanne, Anne-Lise Kjær, Helle Krunke and Mikael Rask Madsen
eds. 2008 Paradoxes of European Legal Integration Great Britain Ashgate 149 157
Pinkal, Manfred
1985Logik und Lexikon – Die Semantik des Unbestimmten. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, Steven
1994The Language Instinct. The New Science of Language and Mind. London: The Penguin Press.Google Scholar
Poscher, Ralph
2016Ambiguity and Vaguness in Legal Interpretation. The Oxford Handbook of Language and the Law, ed. by Lawrence M. Solan and Peter M. Tiersma, 128–145. UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor
1975Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Pychology: General 104. 192–233. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eleanor, Rosch
1978Principles of categorization: a historical view. In Cognition and Categorization. ed. by Eleanor Rosch and Barbara L. Lloyd. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 27–48.Google Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor and Carolyn B. Mervis
1975Studies in the Internal Structure of Categories. Cognitive Psychology 7. 573–605. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sacco, Rodolfo
2005 “Language and Law.” In Ordinary Language and Legal Language ed. by Barbara Pozzo, 1–21. Milan: Giuffrè.Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward
1921Language. An introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.Google Scholar
Šarčević, Susan
2009 “Book Review of Heikki E.S. Mattila. Comparative Legal Linguistics.” Target 21: 1 (2009), 150–156. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 “Creating a Pan-European Legal Language.” In Legal Discourse across Languages and Cultures, ed. by Maurizio Gotti, and Christopher Williams, 23–51. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Shuy, Roger W.
2016 “Using Linguistics in Trademark Cases.” In The Oxford Handbook of Language and the Law ed. by Lawrence M. Solan and Peter M. Tiersma, 449–463. UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Simonnæs, Ingrid
2007 “Vague legal concepts. A contradictio in adjecto?” In Indeterminacy in Terminology and LSP, ed. by Bassey-Edem Antia, 119–134. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Solan, Lawrence M.
2016 “Linguistic Issues in Statutory Interpretation.” In The Oxford Handbook of Language and the Law, ed. by Lawrence M. Solan and Peter M. Tiersma, 87–100. UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Solan, Lawrence M. and Peter M. Tiersma
2005Speaking of Crime. The Language of Criminal Justice. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Stygall, Gail
2016 “Discourse in the US Courtroom.” In The Oxford Handbook of Language and the Law ed. by Lawrence M. Solan and Peter M. Tiersma, 369–381. UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Trench, Richard Chenevix
1852On the Study of Words. Available at: http://​www​.etymonline​.com​/index​.php​?term​=schadenfreude (accessed 9 November 2011).
Tuđman Vuković, Nina
2009Značenje u kognitivnoj lingvistici. Suvremena Lingvistika 67. 125–150.Google Scholar
Van Hoecke, Mark
2002Law as Communication. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Wagner, Anne and Jean-Claude Gémar
(2013) Materializing Notions, Concepts and Language into Another Linguistic Framework. Int J Semiot Law (2013) 26: 731–745. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna
1996Semantics. Primes and Universals. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Žic-Fuchs, Milena
2009Kognitivna lingvistika i present perfect. Zagreb: Nakladni zavod Globus.Google Scholar
1991Znanje o jeziku i znanje o svijetu. Zagreb: SOL.Google Scholar

Translation studies, legal translation

Baaij, Jaap C.J.W.
(ed.) 2012The role of legal translation in legal harmonization. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
2015 “EU Translation and the Burden of Legal Knowledge.” In Language and Culture in EU Law: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, ed. by Susan Šarčević 109–123. Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Bajčić, Martina
2014 “Towards a Terminological Approach to Translating European Contract Law.” In Pragmatic Issues in Legal Translation: from the Different Language Versions of the DCFR to the CESL Proposal, ed. by Barbara Pasa and Lucia Morra, 125–147. München: Sellier.Google Scholar
Biel, Łucja
2007Translation of Multilingual EU Legislation as a Subgenre of Legal Translation. In Court Interpreting and Legal Translation in the Enlarged Europe, ed. by Danuta Kierzkowska, 144–163. Warsaw: Translegis.Google Scholar
Cao, Deborah
2007Translating law. Clevendon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Cheng, Le and King-Kui Sin
2008Terminological equivalence in legal translation: A semiotic approach. Semiotica 172–1/4 (2008), 33–45.Google Scholar
Cheng, Le, King-Kui Sin and Winnie Cheng
2014Legal translation: A sociosemiotic approach. Semiotica 2014; 201: 17–33.Google Scholar
Chromá, Marta
2014Making Sense in Legal Translation. Semiotica 2014; 201: 121–144.Google Scholar
Engberg, Jan
2013Comparative law for translation: The key to successful mediation between legal systems. In Legal Translation in Context: Professional Issues and Prospects ed. by Anabel Borja Albi and Fernando Prieto Ramos. Bern: Peter Lang. . 9–25.Google Scholar
2014General and Specific Perspectives on Vagueness in Law – Impact upon the Feasibility of Legal Translation. In Translating the DCFR and Drafting the CESL. A Pragmatic Perspective ed. by Barbara Pasa and Lucia Morra. Munich: Sellier 147–163. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gémar, Jean-Claude
1995Traduire ou l’art d’interpréter. 2 vol. Sainte-Foy: Presses de l’Université du Québec.Google Scholar
2001Seven pillars for the legal translator: Knowledge, know-how, and art. In Legal translation, preparation for accession to the European Union, ed. by. Susan Šarčević, 111–138. Rijeka: University of Rijeka.Google Scholar
Glanert, Simone
2014Law-in-translation: an assemblage in motion. The Translator, 20: 3, 255–272. Crossref.Google Scholar
Groot, Gérard-René de
2006 “Legal translation.” In Elgar encyclopedia of comparative law, ed. by Jan M. Smith, 423–433. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jopek-Bosiacka, Anna
2013Comparative law and equivalence assessment of system-bound terms in EU legal translation. In Linguistica Antverpiensia – New Themes in Translation Studies. No. 12 2013 110–146.Google Scholar
Kasirer, Nicholas
2001François Gény’s libre recherche scientifique as a Guide for Legal Translation. Louisiana Law Review, vol. 61/2. 331–352.Google Scholar
Kjær, Anne-Liese
2010Nonsense: The CILFIT Criteria Revisited: from the Perspective of Legal Linguistics, in Henning Koch, Jospeh H. H. Weiler, Karsten Hagel-Sørensen and Ulrich Haltern. Europe. The New Legal Realism. Essays in Honour of Hjalte Rasmussen. Copenhagen: Djøf. 217–396.Google Scholar
2014New challenges to the theory of legal translation: transnational legal communication and the autonomization of international law. Translator 20 (3): 430–436. September 2014. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015 “Theoretical Aspects of Legal Translation in the EU: The Paradoxical Relationship between Language, Translation and the Autonomy of EU Law.” In Language and Culture in EU Law: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, ed. by Susan Šarčević, 91–109. Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Koller, Werner
1992Einführung in die Übersetzungswissenschaft. Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer.Google Scholar
Newmark, Paul
1982Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Nida, Eugene and Charles Taber
1974The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
Nord, Christiane
2012Quo vadis, functional translatology? Target, vol. 24. Issue 1. 26–43. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Olsen, Frances, Alexander Lorz and Dieter Stein
(eds.) 2009Translation issues in language and law. Basinstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pommer, Sieglinde
2006Rechtsübersetzung und Rechtsvergleichung. Translatologische Fragen zur Interdisziplinarität. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Prieto Ramos, Fernando
2014International and supranational law in translation: from multilingual lawmaking to adjudication. The Translator 2014 Vol. 20, No. 3, 313–331. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schleiermacher, Friedrich
2012 “On the Different Methods of Translating” (Bernofsky, Susan, trans.). In The translation studies reader, edited by Lawrence Venuti, 43–63. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Simonnæs, Ingrid
2013Legal translation and “traditional” comparative law – Similarities and differences. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series – Themes in Translation Studies 12, 147–160.Google Scholar
Stolze, Radegundis
1992Hermeneutisches Übersetzen. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
2016 “Principles of Document Translation.” In Towards the Professionalization of Legal Translators and Court Interpreters in the EU, ed. by Martina Bajčić and Katja Dobrić Basaneže, 188–210. UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Šarčević, Susan
2000New Approach to Legal Translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
2014Legal Translation and Legal Certainty/Uncertainty: From the DCFR to the CESL Proposal. In Translating the DCFR and Drafting the CESL. A Pragmatic Perspective, ed. by Barbara Pasa and Lucia Morra. Munich: Sellier. 47–70. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Venuti, Lawrence
1995The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. 2nd edition. Oxon: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Law, (multilingual) interpretation

Azuelos-Atias, Sol
2013 “The purposive method of legal interpretation in practice.” International Journal of Law, Language and Discourse. Vol. 3.1 2013, 30–54.Google Scholar
Baaij, Jaap C.J.W.
2012 “Fifty Years of Multilingual Interpretation in the European Union.” In The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law, ed. by Lawrence M. Solan and Peter Tiersma, 217–231. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bengoetxea, Joxerramon
2011 “Multilingual and Multicultural Legal Reasoning: The European Court of Justice.” In Linguistic Diversity and European Democracy, ed. by Kjær, Anne-Liese and Silvia Adamo, 97–22. Great Britain: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Bennet, Robert W.
2016 “Constitutional Interpretation.” In The Oxford Handbook of Language and the Law, ed. by Lawrence M. Solan and Peter M. Tiersma, 114–128. UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bix, Brian H.
2016 “Legal Interpretation and the Philosophy of Language.” In The Oxford Handbook of Language and the Law, ed. by Lawrence M. Solan and Peter M. Tiersma, 145–159. UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bobek, Michal
2007–2008On the Application of European Law in (Not Only) the Courts of the New Member States: “Don’t Do as I Say”? Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, Vol. 10. Cambridge: Centre for European Legal Studies, 1–34.Google Scholar
2011The Multilingualism of the European Union Law in the National Courts: Beyond the Textbooks. In Linguistic Diversity and Eureopan Democracy, ed. by Anne-Liese Kjær and Silvia Adamo, 123–142. Great Britain: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Brown, Lionel N. and Kennedy, Tom
2000 Brown&Jacobs: The Court of Justice of the European Communities. London: Sweet & Maxwell.Google Scholar
Bund, Elmar
1983Juristische Logik und Argumentation. Verlag Rombach: Freiburg am Breisgau..Google Scholar
Burnham, William
2006Introduction to the Law and Legal System of the United States. Fourth Edition. St. Paul: Thomson West.Google Scholar
Calster, Geert van
1997‘The EU’s Tower of Babel – The Interpretation by the European Court of Justice of Equally Authentic Texts Drafted in More than One Official Language’. Yearbook of European Law 17 (1997: 363–393). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ćapeta, Tamara
2009Multilingual Law and Judicial Interpretation in the EU. Croatian Yearbook of European Law and Policy, Vol. 5 No. 5 November 2009 P. 1–17.Google Scholar
Crennan, Susan
2010Statute Society Paper/London, 1 February 2010: Statutes and the Contemporary Search for Meaning, available at: http://​www​.hcourt​.gov​.au​/assets​/publications​/speeches​/current​-justices​/crennanj​/crennanj1feb10​.pdf (accessed: 1 October 2014).
Derlén, Mattias
2009Multilingual Interpretation of European Union Law. The Netherlands: Wolters Kluwer.Google Scholar
Driedger, Elmer A.
1974The Construction of Statutes. Toronto: Butterworths.Google Scholar
1976The Composition of Legislation. Ottawa: Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Ellsworth, Phoebe C.
2005 “Legal Reasoning.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning ed. by Keith J. Holyoak and Robert G. Morrison Jr., 685–704. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fennelly, Nial
1997Legal Interpretation at the European Court of Justice. 20 Fordham Int’l LJ.Google Scholar
Fish, Stanley
1993 “How Come you Do me Like you Do? A Reply to Dennis Patterson’. 72 Texas Law Review, 57 (1993).Google Scholar
Golding, Martin P.
1984Legal Reasoning. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Hart, H.L.A.
1958Positivism and Separation of Law and Morals. 71 Harvard Law Review 593. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1994The Concept of Law. Clarendon.Google Scholar
Heuston, R.F.V.
1977Salmond on the Law of Torts 56 (17th ed.).Google Scholar
Kymlicka, Will
2001Politics in the Vernacular. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Larenz, Karl
1983Methodenlehre der Rechtswissenschaft. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Legrand, Pierre
2008Word/World (of Primordial Issues for Comparative Legal Studies in Paradoxes of European Legal Integration. ed. byHanne, Petersen, Anne-Lise Kjær, Helle Krunke and Mikael Rask Madsen, Great Britain: Ashgate. 185–235.Google Scholar
Luttermann, Karin
2009Multilingualism in the European Union, Status quo and perspectives: The reference language model. In Grewendorf & Rathert (eds.). Formal Linguistics and Law. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 315–338.Google Scholar
Madsen, Mikael R.
2008 “Introduction: An Ever Closer Union – An Ever Larger Market: Lawyers and the Transnational Construction of European Institutions and Markets.” In Paradoxes of European Legal Integration, ed. by Hanne Petersen, Anne Lise Kjær, Helle Krunke and Mikael Rask Madsen, 67–75. Great Britain: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Mayrand, Albert
1994 “L’autorité du précédent au Québec.” Revue juridique Thémis, vol. 28, numéros 2 et 3, Available at: https://​ssl​.editionsthemis​.com​/revue​/article​-4404​-l​-autorite​-du​-precedent​-au​-quebec​.html. Accessed 5 September 2016.
McAuliffe, Karen
2013The Limitations of a Multilingual Legal System, Int J Semiot Law (2013) 26: 861–882. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nedzel, Nadia E.
2008Legal Reasoning, Research, and Writing for International Graduate Students. Second edition. Aspen Publishers, Wolters Kluwer.Google Scholar
Peruginelli, Ginerva
2010Accessing Legal Information Across Boundaries: A New Challenge. International Journal of Legal Information: Vol. 37: 3, article 4.).Google Scholar
Pokrajac, Đuro
2001Kaznena djela zlouborabe položaja i ovlasti iz čl. 337. i zlouporabe ovlasti u gospodarskom zposlovanju iz čl. 292. KZ te njihova primjena u praksi. Hrvatski ljetopis za kazneno pravo i praksu. Zagreb, vol. 8, No. 2/2001 171–178.Google Scholar
Robertson, Colin
2015 “EU Multilingual Law.” In Language and Culture in EU Law: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, ed.by Susan Šarčević, 33–53. Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Samardžija, Višnja and Hrvoje Butković
2010From the Lisbon Strategy to Europe 2020. Zagreb: Institute for International Relations.Google Scholar
Šarčević, Susan
2013Multilingual Lawmaking and Legal (Un)Certainty in the European Union. International Journal of Law, Language and Discourse. Vol. 3.1 2013, 1–29.Google Scholar
Savigny, Friedrich Karl von
1802Juristische Methodenlehre. (Anleitungen zu einem anderen Studium der Jurisprudenz. 18032/3) Hrsg. V. Gerhard Wesenberg. Stuttgart 1951.Google Scholar
Schilling, Theodor
2010 “Beyond Multilingualism: On Different Approaches to the Handling of Diverging Language Versions of a Community Law.” In European Law Journal 16. 47–66. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schübel-Pfister, Isabel
2004Sprache und Gemeinschaftsrecht – Die Auslegung der mehrsprachig verbindlichen Rechtstexte durch den Europäischen Gerichtshof. Berlin: Duncker & Humboldt.Google Scholar
Solan, Lawrence. M.
2007 “Statutory Interpretation in the EU: The Augustinian Approach.” Brooklyn Law School, Legal Studies Paper No. 78. Available at: http://​papers​.ssrn​.com​/sol3​/papers​.cfm​?abstract​_id​=998167 (accessed 1 September 2014). Crossref
van Hecke, Georges A.
1962 “A Civilian Looks at the Common-Law Lawyer.” In International Contracts: Choice of Law and Language, ed. by Willis L.M. Reese, 5–13. Thirthieth Anniversary Symposium. Parker School Studies in Foreign and Comparative Law. Dobbs Ferry, New York: Oceana Publications Inc.Google Scholar
Wank, Rolf
1985Die juristische Begriffsbildung. München: Beck.Google Scholar
White, James Boyd
1987 “The Invisible Discourse of the Law: Reflections on Legal Literacy and General Education.” In A Student’s Guide to the Study of Law: An Introduction, by L.H. LaRue. New York: Matthew Bender.Google Scholar
Zweigert, Konrad and Hein Kötz
1998An Introduction to Comparative Law, 3e ed. trad. Par Tony Weir, Oxford, Oxford University Press [Einführung in die Rechtsvergleichung, 3e ed., Tübingen, JC.B. Moh, 1996].Google Scholar

Case law:

UK, US and Australian case law

Heydon’s case (1584) 3 Co Rep 7a at 638 [76 ER 637 at 638]

Mownsell v Olins (1975) AC 373

Commonwealth v. Webster, 59 Mass (5 Cush.) 295, 320 (1850)

King v. Burwell 576 U.S. _ (2015) United States v. Windsor 570 U.S. _ (2013)

Re Ferrero Litigation, 794 F.Supp.2d 1107 (2011).

Lucy v Zehmer, 196 Va. 493; 84 S.E.2d 516 (1954)

Adams v New Jersey Steamboat Co. 1896. 151 N.Y. 163, 45 N.E. 369.

Conagra, Inc., v George A. Hormel, & Company, 990 F.2d 368 (8th Cir. 1993)

Rovira v Boget, 240 N.Y. 214, 148 N.E. 534, 535

Nix v Hedden, 149 U.S. 304 (1893)

Pillowtex Corp. v United States, 171 F.3d 1370, 1373 (Fed.Cir. 1999)

JVC Co. of Am., Div. Of US JVC Corp. v United States, 234 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2000)

Erie v Pap’s A.M. (529 U.S. 277, 2000)

McCutcheon v Federal Election Commission 572 U.S. Supreme Court, 2014

McBoyle v United States, 283 U.S. 25 (1931)

Newberry v Simmonds, [1961] 2 Q.B. 345

Smart v Allen, [1963] 1 Q.B. 291

Chicago Health Clubs, 347 F.Supp. 955 [N.D. Ill. 1972]

King v. Burwell 576 U.S. _ (2015)

United States v. Windsor 570 U.S. _ (2013)

ECtHR’s case law:

Cengiz and Others v Turkey (applications nos. 48226/10 and 14027/11).

Sramek v Austria (application no. 8790/79).

CJEU’s case law:

Case 66/85 Lawrie-Blum v Land Baden-Württemberg [1986] ECR 2121

Case C-279/93 Finanzamt Köln-Altstadt v Schumacker [1995] ECR I-225

Case C-196/04 Cadbury Schweppes plc, Cadbury Schweppes Overseas Ltd v Commissioners of Inland Revenue [2006] ECR I-07995

Case C-449/93 Rockfon A/S v. Specialarbejderforbundet i Danmark [1995] ECR I-4291.

Case C-30/77 Régina v Pierre Bouchereau [1977] ECR 1999

Case C-102/81 Nordsee v Reederei Mond [1982] ECR 1095

Case C-219/95 P. Ferriere Nord SpA v The Commission of the European Communities [1997] ECR I-4411

Case C-296/95 The Queen v Commissioners of Customs and Excise, ex parte: EMU Tabac SARL and others [1998] ECR I-1605

Case C-72/95 Aannemersbedriff P.K. Kraaijeveld BV e.a. v Gedeouteerde Staaten van Zuid-Hollan [1996] ECR I-5403

Case C-80/76 North Kerry Milk Products v Minister for Agriculture [1977] ECR 425

Case C 100/84 Commission v UK [1985] ECR 1169

Case 13/61, Kledingverkoopbedrijf de Geus en Uitdenbogerd v Robert Bosch GmbH and Maatschappij tot voorzetting van de zaken der Firma Willem van Rijn [1962] ECR English special edition 45

Case C-76/90 Saeger v Dennemeyer [1991] ECR I-4221

Case C-55/94, Reinhard Gebhard v. Consiglio dell’Ordine degli Avvocati e Procuratori di Milano, [1996] ECR I-4165

Case C-361/01 P, Christina Kik v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market [2003] ECR I-8283

Case C-283-81 Srl CILFIT and Lanificio di Gavardo SpA v Ministry of Health [1982] ECR 3415

Case C-372/88 Milk Marketing Board of England and Wales v Cricket St Thomas Estate [1990] ECR I 1345

Case C-149/97 The Institute of the Motor Industry v Commissioners of Customs and Excise [1998] ECR I 7053

Case C-296/95 The Queen v. Commissioners of Customs and Excise, ex parte EMU Tabac SARL. The Man in Black Ltd. John Cunningham [1998] ECR I-1605

Case C-9/79 Marianne Wörsdorfer, née Koschniske v Raad van Arbeid [1979] ECR 2717

Case 489/07, Pia Messner v Firma Stefan Krüger [2007] I-7315

Case C-372/04, Yvonne Watts v Bedford Primary Care Trust and Secretary of State for Health, [2006] I-04325

Case C-157/99, Geraets-Smith and Peerbooms [2001] ECR I-5473

Case-203/99, Henning Veedfald v. Århus Amtskommune [2001] ECR I-03569

Joint cases C-159/91 and C-160/91 Poucet v. Assurances Generales de France and Pistre ECR I-00637 FENIN v. Commission c-205/03 (1s1/07/2006) ECR I-6295

Case C-452/13 Germanwings GmbH v Ronny Henning: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Salzburg (Austria) lodged on 12 August 2013

Case C-409/12 Backaldrin Österreich The Kornspitz Company GmbH ECLI:EU:C:2014:2141. v Pfahnl Backmittel GmbH [2014] ECR not yet available; judgment of 6 March 2014. ECLI:CU 2014:130.

Case 26/62 Van Gend en Loos v Netherlands [1963] ECR 1

Case 2/74 Gabrielle Defrenne v Société anonyme belge de navigation aérienne Sabena [1974] ECR 631

Case 14/83 Sabine von Colson and Elisabeth Kamann v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen [1984] ECR 1891

Case C-106/89 Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA [1990] ECR I-4135

Case C-334/92 Teodoro Wagner Miret v Fondo de Garantía Salarial [1993] ECR I-6911

Case 6/64 Flaminio Costa v ENEL [1964] ECR 1203

Case 106/77 Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v Simmenthal SpA [1978] ECR 629

Case 249/81 Commission v Ireland [1982] ECR 4005.

Case C-243/08 Pannon GSM Zrt. v Erzsébet Sustikné Győrfi [2009] ECR I-04713

Dictionaries and term databanks:

A Dictionary of the English Language: A Digital Edition of the 1755 Classic by Samuel Johnson
Burton, William C.
2007Burton’s Legal Thesaurus. Fourth edition. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Garner, Bryan A.
2007Black’s Law Dictionary. 8. edition. St. Paul, Minnesota: Thompson West.Google Scholar
Creifelds Rechtswörterbuch
2000 Sechzehnte 16. Auflage. München: C. H. Beck.Google Scholar
Croatian National Termbank: STRUNA
Dietl, Clara-Erika and Egon Lorenz
2005Dictionary of Legal; Commercial and Political Terms with Commentaries in German and English. 5. Auflage. München: C. H. Beck OHG.Google Scholar
Gačić, Milica
2010Englesko-hrvatski rječnik prava međunarodnih odnosa, kriminalistike i forenzičnih znanosti, kriminologije i sigurnosti. Zagreb: Školska knjiga.Google Scholar
Guralnik, David E.
1968Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language. New York: Popular Library Inc.Google Scholar
Jovanović, Jasmina and Svetlana Todorović
2003Rečnik pravnih termina: srpsko-englesko-francuski. 3. edition. Beograd: Savremena administracija.Google Scholar
Köbler, Gerhard
2001Rechtsenglisch: deutsch-englisches und englisch-deutsches Rechtswörterbuch für jedermann. Unter Mitarbeit von Gregor Schusterschitz. 5. edition. München: Vahlen.Google Scholar
Romain, Alfred, B. Sharon Byrd and Carola Thielecke
2002Dictionary of Legal and Commercial Terms. Verlag C.H. Beck OHG, Munich Helbing&Lichtenhahn, Basel, Wien: Manz’sche Verlags- und Universitaetsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Von Beseler, Dora and Barbara Jacobs-Wüstefeld
1991Law Dictionary. Fachwörterbuch der anglo-amerikanischen Rechtssprache einschließlich wirtschaftlicher und politischer Begriffe. Deutsch-Englisch. 4., neubearbeitete und erweiterte Auflage. Berlin – New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Other

Bryson, Bill
1990Mother Tongue. The Story of the English Language. UK: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
2003A Short History of Nearly Everything. USA: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
Isaacson, Walter
2011Steve Jobs. US: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Carroll, Lewis
1872Through the Looking-Glass. London: Macmillan and Co.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 17 other publications

No author info given
2017. Publications received. Terminology. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Issues in Specialized Communication 23:2  pp. 293 ff. Crossref logo
Bajčić, Martina
2018.  In Transnational, European, and National Labour Relations [Europeanization and Globalization, 4],  pp. 97 ff. Crossref logo
Bajčić, Martina
2020. Linguistic Comparison within CJEU’s Decision-Making: A Debunking Exercise. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique Crossref logo
Bajčić, Martina & Adrijana Martinović
2018.  In Language and Law,  pp. 207 ff. Crossref logo
Biel, Łucja, Agnieszka Biernacka & Anna Jopek-Bosiacka
2018.  In Language and Law,  pp. 249 ff. Crossref logo
Biel, Łucja & Agnieszka Doczekalska
2020. How do supranational terms transfer into national legal systems?. Terminology. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Issues in Specialized Communication 26:2  pp. 184 ff. Crossref logo
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
Cheng, Le, Jiamin Pei & Marcel Danesi
2019. A sociosemiotic interpretation of cybersecurity in U.S. legislative discourse. Social Semiotics 29:3  pp. 286 ff. Crossref logo
Dobrić Basaneže, Katja
2018.  In Language and Law,  pp. 225 ff. Crossref logo
Muravev, Yury
2020. TEACHING LEGAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION BY THE CASE METHOD IN RUSSIAN-ENGLISH LANGUAGE PAIR. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews 8:4  pp. 961 ff. Crossref logo
Paolucci, Sandro
2017. Foreignising and domesticating strategies in translating legal texts . International Journal of Legal Discourse 2:2  pp. 243 ff. Crossref logo
Sosoni, Vilelmini
2018.  In Language and Law,  pp. 179 ff. Crossref logo
Urrutia, Andrés M.
2020. Jurilinguistics and Minority Languages: General Framework, Methodological Approach and the Case of the Basque Language. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique Crossref logo
Zeifert, Mateusz
2020. Prototype Theory in the Judicial Practice of the Court of Justice of the European Union. A Case Study. Comparative Legilinguistics 44:1  pp. 93 ff. Crossref logo
Zeifert, Mateusz
2020. Rethinking Hart: From Open Texture to Prototype Theory—Analytic Philosophy Meets Cognitive Linguistics. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique Crossref logo
Zeifert, Mateusz & Zygmunt Tobor
2021. Legal Translation Versus Legal Interpretation. A Legal-Theoretical Perspective. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique Crossref logo
Ćorić, Dragana
2019. The standpoint of Arthur Kaufman about relationship between law and language. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta, Novi Sad 53:1  pp. 195 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 september 2021. 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.

Subjects & Metadata

Terminology & Lexicography

Lexicography
Terminology
BIC Subject: CFM – Lexicography
BISAC Subject: LAN021000 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Spelling & Vocabulary
ONIX Metadata
ONIX 2.1
ONIX 3.0
U.S. Library of Congress Control Number:  2016053197 | Marc record