Article published in:
Corpus-Based Research in Legal and Institutional Translation
Edited by Fernando Prieto Ramos
[Translation Spaces 8:1] 2019
► pp. 93–116

Building representative multi-genre corpora for legal and institutional translation research

The LETRINT approach to text categorization and stratified sampling

| University of Geneva
| University of Geneva
| University of Geneva

Exploring questions of representativeness, balance and comparability is essential to tailoring corpus design and compilation to research goals, and to ensuring the validity of research results. This is especially true when the target population of texts under examination is very large and transcends a restricted area of specialization and/or covers multiple genres, as in the case of texts translated in institutional settings. This paper describes the multilayered sequential approach to corpus building applied in a comparative study on legal translation in three of these settings. The approach is based on a full mapping and categorization of institutional texts from a legal perspective; it applies an innovative combination of stratified sampling techniques integrating quantitative and qualitative criteria adapted to the research aims. The resulting corpora, categorization matrix and selection records, together with the methodological detail provided, can be useful for building other multi-genre corpora in translation studies and further afield.

Keywords: corpus, representativeness, text categorization, stratified sampling, genre, balance, legal translation, institutional translation
Article outline
  • 1.Representativeness and research needs: LETRINT’s corpus-building sequence
  • 2.Mapping institutional text production: The LINST corpora set
  • 3.Categorization of institutional texts: From LINST to LETRINT 0
  • 4.Stratified systematic sampling: From LETRINT 0 to LETRINT 1
    • 4.1Selection of genres
    • 4.2Tailored selection of textual units by stratum
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 26 June 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.00014.pri
References
Aston, Guy
1999 “Corpus Use and Learning to Translate.” Textus 121: 289–314.Google Scholar
Atkins, Sue, Jeremy Clear, and Nicholas Ostler
1992 “Corpus Design Criteria.” Literary and Linguistic Computing 7 (1): 1–16. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas
1988 Variation Across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1990 “Methodological Issues Regarding Corpus-based Analyses of Linguistic Variation.” Literary and Linguistic Computing 51: 257–269. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1993 “Representativeness in Corpus Design.” Literary and Linguistic Computing 8 (4): 243–257. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bowker, Lynne, and Jennifer Pearson
2002 Working with Specialized Language: A Practical Guide to Using Corpora. London and New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cerutti, Giorgina
2017 “Evaluating Tools for Legal Translation Research Needs: The Case of Fourth-generation Concordancers.” Legal Translation and Court Interpreting: Ethical Values, Quality, Competence Training, edited by Annikki Liimatainen, Arja Nurmi, Marja Kivilehto, Leena Salmi, Anu Viljanmaa, and Melissa Wallace, 357–391. Berlin: Frank & Timme.Google Scholar
Claridge, Claudia
2008 “Historical Corpora.” Corpus Linguistics, edited by Anke Lüdeling, and Merja Kytö, 242–259. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Corpas Pastor, Gloria, and Miriam Seghiri Domínguez
2007 “Determinación del umbral de representatividad de un corpus mediante el algoritmo N-Cor [Establishing a corpus representativeness threshold through the N-Cor algorithm].” Procesamiento del lenguaje natural 391: 165–172.Google Scholar
European Commission
2014 “Theme: Sample Selection–Main Module.” Memobust Handbook on Methodology of Modern Business Statistics. Brussels: European Commission. Accessed December 18, 2018. https://​ec​.europa​.eu​/eurostat​/cros​/system​/files​/Sample%20Selection​-01​-T​-Main%20Module%20v1​.0​_1​.pdf
Felici, Annarita
2015 “Translating EU Legislation from a ‘Lingua Franca’: Advantages and Disadvantages.” Language and Culture in EU Law: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Susan Šarčević, 123–140. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Halverson, Sandra
1998 “Translation Studies and Representative Corpora: Establishing Links between Translation Corpora, Theoretical/Descriptive Categories and a Conception of the Object of Study.” Meta: Translators’ Journal 43 (4): 494–514. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Husa, Jaakko
2012 “Understanding Legal Languages-Linguistic Concerns of the Comparative Lawyer.” The role of legal translation in legal harmonization, edited by Cornelis J. W. Baaij, 161–181. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
Koester, Almut
2010 “Building Small Specialised Corpora.” The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics, edited by Michael McCarthy, and Anne O’Keeffe, 66–79. Abingdon: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey
1991 “The State of the Art in Corpus Linguistics.” English Corpus Linguistics: Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik, edited by Karin Aijmer, and Bengt Altenberg, 8–29. London: Longman.Google Scholar
2007 “New Resources, or Just Better Old Ones? The Holy Grail of Representativeness.” Corpus Linguistics and the Web, edited by Marianne Hundt, Nadja Nesselhauf, and Carolin Biewer, 133–149. Amsterdam: Rodopi. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McEnery, Tony, and Andrew Hardie
2012 Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McEnery, Tony, and Anita Wilson
2001 Corpus Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
McEnery, Tony, Richard Xiao, and Yukio Tono
2006 Corpus-based Language Studies: An Advanced Resource Book. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mellinger, Christopher D., and Thomas A. Hanson
2017 Quantitative Research Methods in Translation and Interpreting Studies. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mori, Laura
(ed) 2018 Observing Eurolects. Corpus Analysis of Linguistic Variation in EU Law, Studies in Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Oostdijk, Nelleke
1991 Corpus Linguistics and the Automatic Analysis of English. Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Prieto Ramos, Fernando
2004 Media and Migrants: A Critical Analysis of Spanish and Irish Discourses on Immigration. Oxford, Bern and New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2014 “International and Supranational Law in Translation: From Multilingual Lawmaking to Adjudication.” The Translator 20 (3): 313–331. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017 “Global Law as Translated Text: Mapping Institutional Legal Translation.” Tilburg Law Review 22 (1–2): 185–214. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2019 “Implications of Text Categorisation for Corpus-based Legal Translation Research: The Case of International Institutional Settings.” Research Methods in Legal Translation and Interpreting: Crossing Methodological Boundaries, edited by Łucja Biel, Jan Engberg, Rosario Martín Ruano, and Vilelmini Sosoni, 29–47. London and New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Prieto Ramos, Fernando, and Diego Guzmán
2018 “Legal Terminology Consistency and Adequacy as Quality Indicators in Institutional Translation: A Mixed-Method Comparative Study.” Institutional Translation for International Governance: Enhancing Quality in Multilingual Legal Communication, edited by Fernando Prieto Ramos, 81–101. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Scott, Michael
2012 WordSmith Tools. Version 6. Stroud: Lexical Analysis Software.Google Scholar
Sinclair, John
2004 Trust the Text: Language, Corpus and Discourse. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2005 “Corpus and Text–Basic Principles.” Developing Linguistic Corpora: A Guide to Good Practice, edited by Martin Wynne, 1–6. Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar
Steinberg, Richard H.
2004 “Judicial Lawmaking at the WTO: Discursive, Constitutional, and Political Constraints.” American Journal of International Law 981: 247–275. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Trklja, Aleksandar, and Karen McAuliffe
2018 “The European Union Case Law Corpus (EUCLCORP): A Multilingual Parallel and Comparative Corpus of EU Court Judgments (March 5, 2018).” Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Corpus-Based Research in the Humanities: CRH-2, edited by Andrew U. Frank, Christine Ivanovic, Francesco Mambrini, Marco Passarotti, and Caroline Sporleder, 217–226. Vienna: Gerastree Proceedings.Google Scholar
van Els, Theo
2001 “The European Union, its Institutions and its Languages: Some Language Political Observations.” Current Issues in Language Planning 2 (4): 311–360. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Varantola, Krista
2000 “Translators, Dictionaries and Text Corpora.” I corpora nella didattica della traduzione, edited by Silvia Bernardini, and Federico Zanettin, 117–133. Bologna: CLUEB.Google Scholar
Walter, Elizabeth
2010 “Using Corpora to Write Dictionaries.” The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics, edited by Michael McCarthy, and Anne O’Keeffe, 428–443. Abingdon: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zanettin, Federico
2012 Translation-Driven Corpora. Corpus Resources for Descriptive and Applied Translation Studies. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar
Zhao, Xingmin, and Deborah Cao
2013 “Legal Translation at the United Nations.” Legal Translation in Context: Professional Issues and Prospects, edited by Anabel Borja Albi, and Fernando Prieto Ramos, 203–220. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Full-text

Building representative multi-genre corpora for legal and institutional translation research
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Guzmán, Diego & Fernando Prieto Ramos
2021. Assessing legal terminological variation in institutional translation. Translation and Translanguaging in Multilingual Contexts 7:2 ► pp. 224 ff. Crossref logo
Prieto Ramos, Fernando & Diego Guzmán
2021. Examining institutional translation through a legal lens. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 33:2 ► pp. 254 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 11 november 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.