Legal translation into a non-mother tongue: The role of L1 revision
The article reflects on the problem of L2 legal translation, paying specific attention to the role of L1 revision and its impact on the overall quality of the final product. Twenty non-native translations (Czech–French) of a legal text were subjected to a two-stage assessment procedure: First, by two native revisers without legal training (revision stage), and second, by two native experts (metarevision stage). In the revision stage, the average quality of the translations was rated between B (good) and C (borderline). During the metarevision stage, the experts identified a higher number or errors, especially in the domain of legal meaning. No less than 84% of the revisions made by the non-expert revisers were confirmed by the expert revisers, while the remaining cases were mostly under-revisions (12%), and, less frequently, over-revisions (4%). In situations where L2 translation is inevitable, L1 revision, even when carried out by professional revisers with little or no legal background, seems to be a viable option. However, all stakeholders should be aware of the risks associated with this practice, bearing in mind the specific nature of legal translation.
L2 translation is far from being a frequent object of research, and this is especially true with respect to Legal Translation Studies. However, it is a fact that in many European countries legal translations are produced by non-native translators. Therefore, more insight is needed into the specificities of this activity, its benefits and risks, as well as the social context in which it is carried out.
2005 “Translating into a Second Language: Can We, Should We?” In In and Out of English: For Better, for Worse?, edited by Gunilla Anderman and Margaret Rogers, 227–241. Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.
2017 “Quality in Institutional EU Translation: Parameters, Policies and Practices.” In Quality Aspects in Institutional Translation, edited by Tomáš Svoboda, Łucja Biel, and Krzysztof Łoboda, 31–57. Berlin: Language Science Press.
2007 “Caveat Translator: Understanding the Legal Consequences of Errors in Professional Translation.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 7: 2–24.
1998Translation into the Second Language. New York: Longman.
2016 “What Types of Errors Do Undergraduate Students Make Depending on Directionality?” In Translation and Meaning. New Series, Vol. 2, Pt. 2, edited by Łukasz Bogucki, Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, and Marcel Thelen, 191–208. Bern: Peter Lang.
Kelly, Dorothy, Anne Martin, Marie-Louise Nobs, Dolores Sanchez, and Catherine Way
2003La direccionalidad en traducción e interpretación: perspectivas teóricas, profesionales y didácticas [Directionality in translation and interpreting: Theoretical, professional and didactical perspectives]. Granada: Atrio.
2007 “Translation Revision: A Study of the Performance of Ten Professional Translators Revising a Legal Text.” In Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies: Selected Contributions from the EST Congress, Lisbon, edited by Yves Gambier, Miriam Shlesinger, and Radegundis Stolze, 115–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
2014Translation into English as a Foreign Language: A Slovak Survey. Banská Bystrica: Belianum.
2007 “Managing Risks and Resources: A Down-to-earth View of Revision.” In Revision and Technical Translation, edited by Louise Brunette, special issue of The Journal of Specialised Translation 8: 57–63.
Rayson, Paul, Xiaolan Xu, Jian Xiao, Anthony Wong, and Qi Yuan
2008 “Quantitative Analysis of Translation Revision: Contrastive Corpus Research on Native English and Chinese Translationese.” Paper presented at XVIIIth FIT World Congress, Shanghai, China, August 2008.
2013 “Translation into a Non-native Language: The Double Life of the Native-speakership Axiom.” In Translation in an Age of Austerity, edited by Vilemini Sosoni and Margaret Rogers, special issue of mTm 5: 60–79.