2. 1 Frequent use of synonyms
The frequent appearance of pairs of synonyms and parallel structure is a notable feature of legal texts. By way of this feature, legal texts expound clearly nearly all the expected conditions. The following is some examples of what we usually see: rights and interests(权益), terms and conditions(条款),complete and final understand(全部和最终的理解), customs fees and duties(关税), losses and damages(损坏), null and void(无效), sign and issue(签发), agreed and accepted(所同意的和所接受的), provisions and stipulations(规定和约定), scope and scale(范围和规模), production and business(生产和经营).
Because of the authoritative nature of legal texts, the translation of these synonyms and parallel structure requires legal translators’ high attention and skill. And the synonyms and parallel structure can be classified in two types (Zhu. 2000:33).
A. Synonyms with more similarities than dissimilarities
(l) An offer shall be null and void under any of the following circumstances. (合同司法, 1999:12)
(2) Any such advantages as is mentioned in this Ordinance is customary in any profession, trade, vocation or calling.
Following the habit of using reiterative in archaic English, synonyms “null and void” are used in the first sentence, instead of a single word “invalid”. Since the employment of the two synonyms is only for the sake of form without special emphasis on the meaning, the translation can be simplified into “无效的”.
In the second example, four synonyms with slight differences are used: profession, trade, vocation and calling. Since in Chinese a mere “职业” can cover all the ranges, it would be redundant to put the four words into “职业、行业、事物、惯例”, which may possibly leave loopholes in some cases.
Here are some other similar examples: fit and proper, full and equal, fulfill or perform, transferable or assignable.
B. Synonyms with more dissimilarity.
(l) the relevant laws and administrative rules and regulations (对外贸易法, 2001:15)
(2) 配额的分配方式和办法由国务院规定. (ibid)
In the first example, “rules” and “regulations” are synonyms, but here their slight difference is emphasized. By the word “rules”, we mean “an official or accepted principle or order which guides behavior, says how things are to be done”, while by “regulations”, we lay more emphasis on its independent status as “an official order”. Therefore, the first example should be put into “有关法律和行政法规的规定”.
In the second example, “both” “方式” and “办法” have the meaning of “plan”. However, in a legal text, “方式” refers to “a method or manner of doing something” while “办法” lays, emphasis on “an action taken to bring about a certain result”. In order to show their difference and faithfully transfer the original purpose of the legal drafters, the seemed example should be put into “Ways and measures for the distribution of quotas shall be prescribed by the State Council.
In closing, the principle of the translation skill of this type of synonyms coordination should be “seeking the common ground while reserving differences”.
2. 2 Preference for nouns
One of the salient features of difference between Chinese and English is their different preference for verbs and nouns respectively. English preference for nominalization is also embodied in legal texts. By using it, the subject of the sentence can be omitted and the sentence is given a formal style. For example:
(l) 发生严重亏损, 一方不履行合同和章程规定的义务、不可抗力等,……可提前终止合同.
…in case of heavy losses, failure of a party to fulfill the obligations prescribed
By the contract or the articles of association, or force majeure, the contract may be terminated…
(2)李明在中国居住期间没有受过刑事制裁.
Li Ming has no record of committing offences against the criminal law during his residence in China.
(3)国家提倡劳动者参加社会义务劳动, 开展劳动竞赛和合理化建议活动.
The state shall advocate the participation of laborers in social voluntary labor and the development of their labor competitions and activities of forwarding rational proposals.
In the above three examples, “ease, losses, failure, record, residence, participation, development” are key words of the noun phrases they are in. These words are used in place of verbs equivalent to the Chinese versions: “occur, lose, do not, be done, reside, participate, develop” with the success of expressing both the meaning of action and state.
2. 3 Preference for implied meaning
In the light of Deborah Cao’s The Illocutionary Act in Translating Chinese Legislative texts, we know that Austin distinguishes two kinds of utteranecs: the constatives and the performatives. The constatives are statements or assertions that describe or report things and events. The performatives are so called by Austin (1962) to recognize their actional nature of what they do as opposed to constative utterances of what they say. Austin terms performative utterances “illocutionary”, and constative utterances “locutionary”. Searle (1969,1976) further expands Austin’s theory and he classifies five categories of illocutionary forces as representatives, commissives, expressives, declaratives, and directives.
转贴于 酷文网-论文下载中心 http://www.coolwen.net
共8页: 上一页 [1] [2] [3] 4 [5] [6] [7] [8] 下一页
网摘收藏:
当前位置:
载入中...
-> 在百度中搜索：
-> 在Google中搜索：