语言学论文哪里有？本报告是以篇章语言学下的七项文本性标准作为指导策略，以《数字人文下语料库语言学和翻译学》为源文本的翻译实践报告。
1. On legal translation, corpora and digital humanities
From an ontological and operational perspective, legal translation practice has evolved noticeably in the last few decades. The implementation of digital tools, such as corpora and the related corpus linguistics applications, has to some extent challenged traditional epistemic structures. The role of translators has evolved, emphasizing their need to act within interoperable professional networks and collaborating communities.
This study is situated within an area of research which is generated by a dynamic connection between three main fields, namely: (1) legalinguistics, which is itself the result of the complex and mutually constructive interaction between linguistics and law; (2) translation studies, with specific reference to legal translation; and (3) corpus linguistics, with a focus on specialized legal corpora.
These three areas can be seen as developing within the overarching concept of digital humanities. Most of the attempts to define its contours are simplistically subject either to outright acceptance or to unreflective rejection; yet, this concept requires a constant problematization, and any definition may seem to disregard the complex nuances that the phenomenon entails.
3. Investigating legal corpora
3.1. Definitional issues
Before discussing the types of legal corpora available, some clarifications will be offered regarding the definitions adopted in this chapter. The traditional distinction between parallel versus comparable corpora is particularly relevant for corpus-assisted translation. Parallel corpora typically include source texts and target texts, while comparable corpora include texts which do not depend on a translation process but which have a given level of comparability in relation to a set of criteria (theme, register, audience, design, etc.).
When discussing parallel corpora, a distinction has also been propounded between unidirectional and bidirectional ones (Olohan 2004). A unidirectional corpus contains ‘source texts in language A and target texts in language B’, whereas a bidirectional one includes ‘source texts in language A and target texts in language B, and source texts in language B and their translation into language A’ (Olohan 2004: 24). For the purpose of this study, one aspect which should be highlighted is that of alignment, which often characterizes parallel corpora. Indeed, while aligned parallel corpora usually comply with specific criteria, comparable corpora are compiled on the basis of more general principles of similarity.
4. Applications
4.1. Tools and processes
Corpora can be convenient for the translation process, especially when automatic or computer-assisted translation is involved. In particular, parallel corpora prove to be highly beneficial in professional translation practice using CAT (Computer-Assisted Translation) tools. These tools provide the translator with quick access to previous translations and term databases and thus contribute to increasing efficiency and productivity.
CAT tools include Translation Memories (TMs) with aligned segments of texts. Yet, for a long time, TMs in the field of legal language appeared to be less common than other types of language due to privacy and confidentiality limitations (Biel 2010). However, their usage has grown considerably in recent years, especially as a consequence of the diffusion of material developed within EU institutions. More specifically, the use of legal corpora is strictly linked to the development of TMs, which include Translation Units (TU) and their translations.13 Among the main Translation Memories we can mention DGTTM (Steinberger et al. 2012), ECDC-TM and EAC-TM.
4.2. Translation practice
Legal corpora, especially of a bilingual or multilingual nature, may be adopted for different professional and research purposes, such as machine translation, comparative legilinguistics or the development of alignment algorithms. Moreover, not only does the use of corpora in translation imply specific applications in the target text (TT) production, but it also involves a series of practices which can be suitable for the translator at various levels of the translation practice. Such processes include: (technical) vocabulary extraction and comparison, analysis of the collocability of words and terms in different languages and specialist fields, raising awareness of stylistic issues and ultimately, from a broader perspective, the evaluation of legal concepts across languages, cultures and legal systems.
The use of corpora in legal investigation can also help us to understand the diachronic evolution of legal language, to define the frequency of specific words and expressions as well as to circumscribe their semantic value in specific legal contexts, and to observe the co-occurrence of words in order to make more appropriate terminological choices. In this respect, corpora can provide legal translators with information on the contexts of use from a terminological and phraseological perspective (see Lombardi 2004, Pontrandolfo 2015). This awareness also has an impact with regard to stylistics as the consultation of corpora can help professionals to produce texts which are stylistically appropriate given the specific context of use and genre-specific conventions.
5. Conclusions
The dynamic and heterogeneous nature of digital humanities as a cultural space is apparently one of its few uncontentious aspects. Confronted with the wide spectrum of roles, forms, functions and statuses of digital humanities, it was not the aim of this chapter to offer an uncontested definition of the area and its boundaries. Rather, it was aimed to problematize it within the legal translation landscape and the related communities of interest, which are increasingly hybrid and complex.
All too often, the transdisciplinary paradigm has to face disciplinary-bound entropic forces. However, what may appear an amorphous field represents a complex ecosystem of knowledge production characterized by multiple trajectories; its evolution and development depend on its ability to prevent disciplinary chasms by enhancing the reciprocal validation of practices originating from different areas.
Often labelled as traditional and static, legal translation has actually been in greater flux than is often assumed. In particular, the productive and polymorphous development of translation practices in the legal field has matured alongside digital advancements. This has generated not only different practical approaches, but novel conceptualizations of such practices too. Corpus linguistic practices, translation frameworks and new digital methods have reciprocally enriched and cross-fertilized the field, contributing to the evolution of legal translation.
reference(omitted)
