영어 번역·비번역 법령 코퍼스의 상호텍스트장치 사용관습 비교 연구
Comparison of Referencing Conventions between English-translated Korean Law Corpus and Non-translated US and British Law Corpora
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The main purpose of this paper is to compare referencing conventions between English-translated Korean laws and non-translated American and British laws in terms of collocational salience and frequencies. Intertexual or referencing devices serve specific functions in the discourse of law, which include signaling textual authority, providing terminological explanation, and facilitating textual mapping. Common law jurisdictions have developed their own preferences in the use of referencing patterns for displaying each function, and established specific contexts of use in their official legislative guidelines. In this respect, English translations of intertextual devices in Korean laws need to reflect the referencing conventions of non-translated laws in order to meet the cognitive expectancy norms of their intended foreign recipients and reduce difficulties with their interpretation at court. The comparison of collocations of main editing units of legislative provisions used in the translated and non-translated law corpora revealed that the translated laws show salient departures from the referencing conventions of TL non-translations for each function, thus requiring revised translation guidelines for ensuring convergence with TL non-translations.
Abstract
The main purpose of this paper is to compare referencing conventions between English-translated Korean laws and non-translated American and British laws in terms of collocational salience and frequencies. Intertexual or referencing devices serve specific functions in the discourse of law, which include signaling textual authority, providing terminological explanation, and facilitating textual mapping. Common law jurisdictions have developed their own preferences in the use of referencing patterns for displaying each function, and established specific contexts of use in their official legislative guidelines. In this respect, English translations of intertextual devices in Korean laws need to reflect the referencing conventions of non-translated laws in order to meet the cognitive expectancy norms of their intended foreign recipients and reduce difficulties with their interpretation at court. The comparison of collocations of main editing units of legislative provisions used in the translated and non-translated law corpora revealed that the translated laws show salient departures from the referencing conventions of TL non-translations for each function, thus requiring revised translation guidelines for ensuring convergence with TL non-translations.
참고문헌 (34)
- 국회법제실, "법제 이론과 실제" (2016), 국회법제실
- 국회법제실, "법제 이론과 실제(전면 개정판)" (2019), 국회법제실
- 법제처, "알기 쉬운 법령 정비 기준" (2019), 법제처
- 유정주, "한국 법령 상호텍스트장치의 영어 번역에 대한 고찰 - 영미법계 국가들의 최신 법제지침 분석결과를 중심으로", 통번역학연구, 26(1), pp.75~106 (2022), 통번역연구소[DOI]
- "Words and phrases guide" (2016)[URL]
- Bhatia, V. K., "An investigation into formal and functional characteristics of qualifications in legislative writing and its application to English for academic legal purposes", doctor, pp.1982
- Bhatia, V. K., "Textual-mapping in British legislative writing", Word Englishes, 6(1), pp.1~10 (1987)
- Bhatia, V. K., "Analysing genre : language use in professional settings" (1993), Longman
- Bhatia, V. K., "Language and the law", pp.136~155 (1994), Longman
- Bhatia, V. K., "Intertextuality in legal discourse", The Language Teacher, 22(11), pp.13~18 (1998)
- Biel, Ł., "Lost in the Eurofog: The Textual Fit of Translated Law" (2014), Peter Lang Edition
- Biel, Ł., "The Ashgate Handbook of Legal Translation", pp.178~192 (2014), Ashgate
- Caldwell, E., "Writing Chinese Laws : The Form and Function of Legal Statutes Found in the Qin Shuihudi Corpus" (2019), Routledge
- Cheng, W., "Exploring Corpus Linguistics: Language in Action" (2012), Routledge
- Crystal, D., "Investigating English Style" (1969), Indiana University Press
- Filson, L. E., "The legislative drafter's desk reference" (2008), CQ Press
- Garner, B. A., "Garner’s dictionary of legal usage" (2011), Oxford University Press
- Gotti, M., "The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law", pp.52~66 (2012), Oxford University Press
- Gozdz-Roszkowski, S., "Patterns of Linguistic Variation in American Legal English. A Corpus-Based Study" (2011), Peter Lang
- "House legislative Counsel's manual on drafting style" (1995)[URL]
- Kilgarriff, A., "The Sketch Engine : ten years on", Lexicography, 1(1), pp.7~36 (2014)
- Kjær, A. L., "Language, text, and knowledge. mental models of expert communication", pp.127~161 (2000), Mouton de Gruyter
- Mattila, H. E. S., "Comparative legal linguistics" (2006), Ashgate
- Menghini, M., "Arbitration awards: Generic features and textual relations", pp.232~251 (2012), Cambridge Scholars
- "Bill drafting manual" (2018)[URL]
- "Office of the Parliamentary Counsel Drafting Guidance" (2018)[URL]
- "Office of the Parliamentary Counsel Drafting Guidance" (2020)[URL]
- Rayson, P., "Matrix: A statistical method and software tool for linguistic analysis through corpus comparison", doctor, pp.2003
- Scott, M., "WordSmith Tools. Version 6. 0" (2015), Oxford University Press
- Sinclair, J., "Corpus, concordance, collocation" (1991), Oxford University Press
- Sinclair, J., "Developing linguistic corpora: A guide to good practice", pp.1~16 (2005), Oxbow Books
- Stubbs, M., "Collocations and semantic profiles : on the cause of the trouble with quantitative studies", Functions of Language, 2(1), pp.23~55 (1995)
- Williams, C., "Modality in English:theory and description", pp.199~210 (2009), M. de Gruyter
- Xanthaki, H., "Thornton's legislative drafting" (2013), Bloomsbury Professional