Cover not available
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

ORCID logo | University of Geneva
ORCID logo | University of Geneva
ORCID logo | 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 [email protected].

Published online: 26 June 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.00014.pri
References (37)
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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation Across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1990. “Methodological Issues Regarding Corpus-based Analyses of Linguistic Variation.” Literary and Linguistic Computing 51: 257–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1993. “Representativeness in Corpus Design.” Literary and Linguistic Computing 8 (4): 243–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowker, Lynne, and Jennifer Pearson. 2002. Working with Specialized Language: A Practical Guide to Using Corpora. London and New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle 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. [URL]
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. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. “Global Law as Translated Text: Mapping Institutional Legal Translation.” Tilburg Law Review 22 (1–2): 185–214. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle 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
Cited by (5)

Cited by five 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. DOI logo
Prieto Ramos, Fernando & Giorgina Cerutti
2021. Terminology as a source of difficulty in translating international legal discourses: an empirical cross-genre study. International Journal of Legal Discourse 6:2 ► pp. 155 ff. DOI logo
Prieto Ramos, Fernando & Giorgina Cerutti
2023. Terminological hybridity in institutional legal translation. Terminology. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Issues in Specialized Communication 29:1 ► pp. 45 ff. DOI 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. DOI logo
Prieto Ramos, Fernando & Diego Guzmán
2023. Measuring the quality of legal terminological decisions in institutional translation. In Handbook of Terminology [Handbook of Terminology, 3], ► pp. 375 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 july 2024. 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.