Translatability Potential of Legal Discourse Viewed from the Philosophical Perspective

Year 2021, Volume: 3 Issue: 4, 35 - 50, 05.04.2021

Nataliia Pavliuk

Abstract

The aim of the paper is to introduce the notion of translatability potential, which can be viewed from the philosophical perspective, as it aligns with the problem of untranslatability raised by several philosophers who referred to translation in general in their works. For instance, Hadamer, Heidegger, Derrida used to speak and meditate the mentioned issue in their works, they were concerned with the potential possibility to express ideas in another language, transfer them to other cultures, and placing them in a new language environment. The paper considers this problem from the point of a legal discourse translation field, as it is a complicated system including multiple aspects presenting challenges for translators, which in the process of translation determines the correlation between the object and the subject. Translatability potential is suggested as a starting point to identify if a text or a linguistic unit is possible to render using another language. The paper also studies how much the interpretation of the source of a legal text affects the fulfillment of its translatability potential.

Keywords

translatability, potential, legal discourse, philosophical perspective

References

• Benjamin, W. (1996). Selected Writings Volume 1. Cambridge, Mass., London, England: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
• Bohachov, A. (2010). Mozhlyvist Perekladu (Possibility of Translation). Filosofska Dumka (Philosophical Thought), 5-21.
• Borutti, S. (2019). Traduzione come conoscenza e rienunciazione. Lingue Culture Mediazioni / Languages Cultures Mediation, 11-22.
• Catford, J. C. (1965). A Linguistic Theory of Translation. London: Oxford University Press.
• Gadamer, H.-G. (1960). Truth and Method. London, New York: Continuum.
• Godino, L. (2016). Discourse and International Relations: a Theoretical and Methodological Approach. JANUS.NET e-Journal of International Relations, 5-13.
• Heidegger, M. (1966). Discourse on Thinking. New York: Harper & Row.
• Heidegger, M. (2001). Being and Time. Oxford, Cambridge: Blackwell.
• Jakobson, R. (1959). On Linguistic Aspects of Translation. In e. R. Brower, On Translation (pp. 232-239). Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
• Neubert, A. (1973). Invarianz und Pragmatik. In Neue Betrage zu Grundfragen der Ubersetzenwissenscahaft (pp. 13-26). Leipzig: VEB Verlag Enzyklopadie.
• Ogden, R. (1923). Meaning of Meaning. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World, Inc.
• Šarčević, S. (1997). New Approach to Legal Translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.
• Schalow, F. (2011). A Conversation with Parvis Emad on the Question of Translation in Heidegger. In Heidegger, Translation, and the Task of Thinking (pp. 175-189). London, New York: Springer.