skip to main content

ON THE CONCEPT OF TERM EQUIVALENCE

Vol.1, Issue 1, 2015, pp.4-17 Full text

Crossmark logo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33919/esnbu.15.1.1
Web of Science: 000449158700001

Author
Diana Yankova https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4524-882X

Affiliation:
New Bulgarian University, Sofia, Bulgaria

Abstract
The article considers some terminological aspects in the process of harmonization of legislation reflecting on different approaches to the study of terms and especially to synonymy and term equivalence. The various mechanisms available to the translator are examined within the EU context and against the background of Bulgaria's legal culture. The analysis is based on translations of EU legislation from English into Bulgarian and highlights felicitous choices and techniques employed, as well as recurring inconsistencies in the long and arduous process of approximation of legislation.

Keywords: harmonization of legislation, supranational law, EU directives, legal terminology, translation equivalence, translation strategies, multilingual communication

Article history:
Submitted: 15 July 2014
Accepted: 21 December 2014
[created1 February 2015]


Citation (APA):
Yankova, D. (2015). On the concept of term equivalence. English Studies at NBU, 1(1), 4-17. https://doi.org/10.33919/esnbu.15.1.1

Copyright © 2015 Diana Yankova

This open access article is published and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. If you want to use the work commercially, you must first get the authors' permission.

References
Jacobs, R. (1995). English Syntax: a Grammar for English Language Professionals. Oxford University Press.

de Groot, G-R. (2000). Translating Legal Information. In G. Zaccaria (Ed.), Journal of Legal Hermeneutics. Translation in Law, 5 (pp. 131-149). Lit Verlag.

Delors, J. (1992, April 11). Survival of the fattest. The Economist, p.32.

Fillmore, C. (1968). The Case for Case. In E. Bach & R.T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory (pp. 1-88). Holt.

Forrest, A. (1998). The Challenges of Languages in Europe. Terminologie et traduction 3, 101-121.

Robertson, C. (2001). Multilingual Law: A Framework for Understanding LSP within the EU. In F. Mayer (Ed.), Language for Special Purposes: Perspectives for the New Millennium, 2 (pp.697-703), Gunter Narr Verlag.

Trosborg, A. (1997). Translating Hybrid Political Texts. In: A. Trosborg (Ed.), Text Typology and Translation (pp. 145-158). John Benjamins. [https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.26.12tro

Šarčević, S. (1997). New Approach to Legal Translation. Kluwer Law International.

Yankova, D., & Vassileva, I. (2002). Supranational Legislative Texts: a New Challenge for Translators in Europe. In H. P. Kelz (Ed.), Die sprachliche Zukunft Europas. Mehrsprachigkeit und Sprachenpolitik (pp. 145-158). Nomos-Verlag.

Yankova, D. (2003). Towards Achieving Equivalence in Bulgarian-English Translation of Statutory Writing. Chuzhdoezikovo obuchenie [Foreign Language Teaching] 3, 52-63.



Article Metrics