This collection on legal interpretation in a broad sense presents state-of-the-art linguistic approaches that are applied for studying interpretation and meaning generation in various legal settings. It covers different aspects of the concepts like judicial dissent, court argumentation, investigating sociological meaning, or comparing legal meaning in comparative law. Scholars can turn to the volume for methods and findings to ground their own inquiries, and students will find guides to topics and methods in the field of law, meaning generation, and language.

A new perspective on how far law's power derives from socially situated communication rather than from abstract rules.

The volume presents a set of invited papers based on analyses of legal discourse drawn from a number of international contexts where often the English language and legal culture has had to adjust to legal concepts very different from those of the English law system. Many of the papers were inspired by two major projects on legal language and inter-multiculturality: Generic Integrity in Legislative Discourse in Multilingual and Multicultural Contexts based in Hong Kong and carried out by an international team and Interculturality in Domain-specific English, a national project supported by the Italian Ministry for Education and Research, involving research units from five Italian universities

This volume investigates advances in the field of legal translation both from a theoretical and practical perspective, with professional and academic insights from leading experts in the field. Part I of the collection focuses on the exploration of legal translatability from a theoretical angle. Covering fundamental issues such as equivalence in legal translation, approaches to legal translation and the interaction between judicial interpretation and legal translation, the authors offer contributions from philosophical, rhetorical, terminological and lexicographical perspectives. Part II focuses on the analysis of legal translation from a practical perspective among different jurisdictions such as China, the EU and Japan, offering multiple and pluralistic viewpoints. This book presents a collection of studies in legal translation which not only provide the latest international research findings among academics and practitioners, but also furnish us with a new approach to, and new insights into, the phenomena and nature of legal translation and legal transfer. The collection provides an invaluable reference for researchers, practitioners, academics and students specialising in law and legal translation, philosophy, sociology, linguistics and semiotics.

Edited by Janet Giltrow and Dieter Stein, the Foundations in Language and Law series aims beyond the traditional surveys of scholarship in law and language. Monographs in the series will provide foundational materials - theoretical, methodological, critical, practical - to advance study of important topics in the field. And even as each volume engages conceptually with current scholarship in the area, it presents original research which breaks new ground and indicates future directions for scholarship in law and language. To discuss your book idea or submit a proposal, please contact Natalie Fecher.

Thesis (M.A.) from the year 2008 in the subject English Language and Literature Studies - Other, grade: 2, University of Münster (Arbeitsbereich Sprachwissenschaft), course: Dialogue Studies, language: English, abstract: In this paper, the major aspects of and essential developments in translation theory, including the ever-recurring question of what constitutes a good translation, will be explored and the particularity of legal translation will be discussed. In the translation of national law terms, many facets have to be kept in mind. For example, the mastering of the different languages poses problems as does the relation of legal texts to different and specific legal systems and cultures. The focus will then switch to legal language in particular. The opposition between word meaning of everyday language and the word meaning of languages for specific purposes will be clarified. Then, particular difficulties in legal language and translation with consideration of the different legal systems where these translations are used will be illustrated with respect to the nature of legal discourse, its dependence on the legal system and the presentation of possible ambiguities and their interpretation. The problem of a common legislation in the European Union is one of finding a legal terminology that is not influenced by its cultural environment – an entirely impossible enterprise.

Since many legal disputes are battles over the meaning of a statute, contract, testimony, or the Constitution, judges must interpret language in order to decide why one proposed meaning overrides another. And in making their decisions about meaning appear authoritative and fair, judges often write about the nature of linguistic interpretation. In the first book to examine the linguistic analysis of law, Lawrence M. Solan shows that judges sometimes inaccurately portray the way we use language, creating inconsistencies in their decisions and threatening the fairness of the judicial system. Solan uses a wealth of examples to illustrate the way linguistics enters the process of judicial decision making: a death penalty case that the Supreme Court decided by analyzing the use of adjectives in a jury instruction; criminal cases whose outcomes depend on the Supreme Court's analysis of the relationship between adverbs and prepositional phrases; and cases focused on the meaning of certain words in the Constitution. Solan finds that judges often describe our use of language poorly because there is no clear relationship between the principles of linguistics and the jurisprudential goals that the judge wishes to promote. A major contribution to the growing interdisciplinary scholarship on law and its social and cultural context, Solan's lucid, engaging book is equally accessible to linguists, lawyers, philosophers, anthropologists, literary theorists, and political scientists.