"ZAMONAVIY TILSHUNOSLIK VA TARJIMASHUNOSLIKNING DOLZARB MUAMMOLARI"
mavzusidagi xalqaro ilmiy-amaliy anjuman
384
CHALLENGES IN TRANSLATING LEGAL TERMS
Jumabayeva Adolat Sabirovna
Associate teacher,
Foreign Philology Faculty,
Urgench State University named after Abu Rayhon Beruni
e-mail:
Abstract:
Legal translation is a specialized field that involves translating legal
documents and texts across different languages. Translators must navigate these legal
and linguistic disparities by adapting legal concepts, borrowing terms, or providing
explanatory translations.
Key words:
legal term, linguistic accuracy, legislative texts, legal translation,
legal precision, common law, civil law.
Annotatsiya:
Huquqiy tarjima – bu hujjatlar va matnlarni turli tillarga tarjima
qilishni talab qiluvchi maxsus sohadir. Tarjimonlar huquqiy va lingvistik tafovutlarni
yengish uchun huquqiy tushunchalarni moslashtirish yoki tushuntirishli tarjimalarni
taqdim etish zarur.
Kalit so‘zlar:
huquqiy atama, lingvistik aniqlik, qonunchilik matnlari, huquqiy
tarjima, huquqiy aniqlik, umumiy huquq, fuqarolik huquqi.
Аннотация:
Юридический перевод – это специализированная область,
связанная с переводом юридических документов и текстов на разные языки.
Переводчики должны преодолевать эти правовые и лингвистические различия
путем адаптации юридических понятий, заимствования терминов или
предоставления разъясняющих переводов.
Ключевые
слова:
юридический
термин,
языковая
точность,
законодательные тексты, юридический перевод, юридическая точность, общее
право, континентальное право.
Legal translation refers to the specialized translation of legal documents and
texts from one language to another. This field involves translating contracts, statutes,
court rulings, legislative texts, patents, and other legal materials. Legal translation is
vital in maintaining the clarity, accuracy, and effectiveness of legal processes across
different legal systems, especially when parties speak different languages.[2]
Translating legal texts requires a deep understanding of both the source and target
languages, as well as the intricacies of the legal systems in which these texts operate.[1]
Legal translation is distinct from general translation in that it requires a high degree of
precision, as even a small mistake can lead to serious consequences. Similarly,
"ZAMONAVIY TILSHUNOSLIK VA TARJIMASHUNOSLIKNING DOLZARB MUAMMOLARI"
mavzusidagi xalqaro ilmiy-amaliy anjuman
385
translating legal rulings or legislative provisions inaccurately can alter their intended
meaning, which may affect the application of law.
Accuracy in legal translation is paramount because legal texts often contain
specific terminology and formal language that must be conveyed precisely.[3] Legal
texts are often written in formal, technical, and specialized language (referred to as
"legalese"), which can present additional challenges for translators. A single
mistranslation can change the interpretation of a law, contract, or legal ruling,
potentially causing irreversible damage to the parties involved.[4] This is especially
important in international contexts, where legal translations often serve as the basis for
resolving cross-border disputes.
Translating legal texts is a highly complex task that presents numerous
challenges. Some of the most common difficulties include:
Languages differ in their structure and syntax, which can make translating legal
terms challenging. For example, English tends to use longer, more complex sentence
structures, while other languages may have different word order or grammatical
constructs. These differences can result in the need to adapt the original sentence
structure while maintaining the legal meaning, a delicate balancing act that requires
deep linguistic expertise.
Legal texts, especially in English-speaking countries, are often written in a way
that is intentionally vague or broad to allow for flexibility in interpretation. For
instance, terms such as "reasonable," "adequate," or "fair" may be purposefully vague
to give courts the discretion to make decisions based on the circumstances of a
particular case. Translating such vague legal terms into a target language like Uzbek,
where the concept of "reasonableness" might not have a direct equivalent, presents
significant challenges.
One of the most significant challenges when translating legal documents
between English and Uzbek is the absence of direct equivalents for legal terms. The
legal systems of English-speaking countries and Uzbekistan differ significantly, and
these differences must be taken into account during translation. For example, the
concept of "common law" in English-speaking countries may not have an exact
equivalent in Uzbek law, which is based on a civil law system. Translators must not
only translate the words but also understand the underlying legal principles and adapt
the translation to fit the context of the Uzbek legal system.
The legal systems of English-speaking countries, such as the United States, the
United Kingdom, and Australia, differ significantly from the legal system of
Uzbekistan. These differences are not only based on the structure of the laws but also
on the underlying principles, procedures, and historical influences. The legal systems
in English-speaking countries are generally based on common law, while Uzbekistan
follows a civil law system. In the English-speaking world, legal systems are often
"ZAMONAVIY TILSHUNOSLIK VA TARJIMASHUNOSLIKNING DOLZARB MUAMMOLARI"
mavzusidagi xalqaro ilmiy-amaliy anjuman
386
characterized by judicial decisions that set precedents, meaning that the rulings made
by higher courts in previous cases can influence future rulings. In contrast,
Uzbekistan’s legal system is rooted in the civil law tradition, where the primary source
of law is written statutes and codes. This distinction creates different legal practices
and influences the nature of legal documentation in both systems.
The core distinction between common law and civil law systems lies in their
sources of law and their approach to legal reasoning. Understanding this difference is
crucial for translating legal texts between English and Uzbek.
Common law, which is followed in countries like the United States, the United
Kingdom, Canada, and Australia, is based on the doctrine of judicial precedents. Legal
rules in common law systems evolve gradually through judicial decisions over time,
and courts play a key role in shaping the law.
Uzbekistan, like many other countries in Europe and Asia, follows the civil law
tradition, which is rooted in Roman law. In civil law systems, written statutes, codes,
and regulations are the primary sources of law. The legal system is codified, meaning
that the law is written in comprehensive legal codes that provide detailed rules and
regulations on a wide range of subjects. Judges in civil law countries do not have the
authority to create law through case law as in common law systems. Instead, they are
expected to apply and interpret the written laws as they are. Legal terminology in civil
law systems tends to be more rigid and precise, as it is derived from statutes rather than
evolving through case law. The differences between common law and civil law systems
have a significant impact on the translation of legal terms between English and Uzbek.
The primary challenge in translating legal terms between these two systems is the lack
of direct equivalents for many terms, as the legal concepts themselves may not exist in
both systems. In common law countries, many legal terms are derived from case law
and judicial precedents. For example, terms like "tort," "negligence," "equity," and
"contractual obligation" carry specific meanings within the common law system that
are shaped by years of legal rulings and judicial interpretations. In contrast, these
concepts may not have direct counterparts in civil law systems like Uzbekistan’s, where
the law is based more on codified statutes. In civil law systems, fairness and justice are
typically addressed through detailed statutes rather than judicial discretion.
Conversely, civil law systems, which are more statutory in nature, often use terms that
reflect the written nature of their legal framework. For instance, terms like "code,"
"statute," or "regulation" are much more common in civil law jurisdictions and can be
translated relatively easily into English. However, the challenge arises when translating
terms that carry cultural and legal implications within a civil law system, but that have
no direct correspondence in common law systems. For example, the term
"jurisprudence" in the civil law system refers to the study or theory of law, which is
often grounded in legal codes and academic scholarship. In common law systems,
"ZAMONAVIY TILSHUNOSLIK VA TARJIMASHUNOSLIKNING DOLZARB MUAMMOLARI"
mavzusidagi xalqaro ilmiy-amaliy anjuman
387
while the term "jurisprudence" is used, the concept is different because the common
law system is more focused on case law and judicial interpretation rather than codified
laws. Translators must adapt their approach to ensure that the term accurately conveys
the intended meaning within the context of the target language and legal system.
In the case of translating between English and Uzbek, the translator may need to
rely on legal dictionaries, glossaries, or consult with legal experts from both systems
to ensure the accuracy of the translation.
The legal systems of English-speaking countries and Uzbekistan differ
significantly in their foundations and application of law. Common law systems are
based on judicial decisions and case law, while civil law systems, such as Uzbekistan’s,
rely on codified statutes and regulations. These differences in legal frameworks have a
direct impact on the translation of legal terms, as many terms may not have direct
equivalents in the other system. Legal translators must carefully navigate these
differences to ensure accuracy and clarity in their translations, often resorting to
adaptation, borrowing, or descriptive translations to convey the correct legal meaning
in the target language.
REFERENCES:
1.
Alcaraz, Enrique & Hughes, Brian.
Legal Translation Explained
(2002)
2.
Cao, Deborah.
Legal Translation
(2007)
3.
Engberg, J. (2014). Legal translation and legal interpretation: The
epistemological gap.
Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice
, 22(4),
492-507.
4.
Enrique Alcaraz and Brian Hughes "Legal Translation Explained" (2014)
5.
Garzone, Giuliana.
"Legal Translation and Functionalist Approaches: A
Contradiction in Terms?"
Perspectives: Studies in Translatology
(2000)
