SPECIAL ASPECTS OF WORKING WITH THE LEXICAL LEVEL OF LEGAL DISCOURSE TEXTS IN THE ENGLISH AND RUSSIAN LANGUAGES

Cover Page

Abstract


This article considers the lexis of legal discourse. The material of the study is the results of a survey conducted among the students of the Law Faculty of the Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, who have the skills to compile and translate legal texts, in particular, international treaties. 58 Bachelor students of the third and fourth year of studies took part in the survey. The analysis of the survey results showed the presence of systemаtic errors and revealed some problem areas in the usage of lexical units while writing and editing texts of this type. The object of the study is legal discourse in Russian and English. The subject of the study is the lexis of international documents and its translation into Russian and English. The relevance of the analysis is supported by the institutional nature of legal discourse texts, i.e. by the necessity of observing certain rules and the mode of communication, as well as by the prescriptive function of legal discourse texts, which requires particular accuracy and absence of contextual synonymy when using lexical units. The authors of the article classified the lexis of this type of texts, which is potentially capable of correlating in the source text and the text-translation, as equivalent contextual-semantic, partially equivalent contextual-semantic and nonequivalent contextual-semantic; they also suggested its description by types and gave examples. The conclusion was that a special set of exercises is needed aimed at developing the necessary skills of differentiating lexical units into types and their translation taking into account the units type in the created or edited text. The necessary recommendation for students will also be the creation of their own individual vocabulary of partially-equivalent and nonequivalent English lexis. Based on the results of the study, the authors introduced a textbook.

About the authors

Natalia V Alontseva

RUDN University

Author for correspondence.
Email: alontseva_nv@rudn.university
11198 Moscow Miklukho-Maklaya st., 6, Russia
Associate professor of the department of foreign languages, RUDN University; academic interests: pragmatics, discourse analysis, methods of teaching foreign languages

Yury A Ermoshin

RUDN University

Email: ermoshin_yua@rudn.university
11198 Moscow Miklukho-Maklaya st., 6, Russia
Associate professor of the department of foreign languages, PhD in Pedagogy, RUDN University; academic interests: pragmatics, discourse analysis, methods of teaching foreign languages

References

  1. Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and Power. L.; N.-Y.: Longman Group UK Limited.
  2. Kaplunenko, A.M. (1992). Historico-functional aspect of idiomatics: (on the material of the phraseology of the English language) [dissertation]. Moscow. (In Russ.).
  3. Foucault, M. (1996). Archeology of knowledge. Kiev: Nika-Center. (In Russ.).
  4. Rusakova, O.F. (2008). PR-Discourse: Theoretical and methodological analysis. Ekaterinburg. (In Russ.).
  5. Palashevskaya, I.V. (2010). Functions of legal discourse and actions of its participants. Izvestiya Samara Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 12 (5 (2)). 535-540. (In Russ.).
  6. Soboleva, A.K. (2000). The canons of interpretation in law, Russian Justice, 10. (In Russ.).
  7. Borovkova, M.V. (2001). Linguostylistic status of texts of legal interpretation and legal interpretation [dissertation]. Ekaterinburg. (In Russ.).
  8. Demyankov, V.Z. (2012). Study of the text and discourse of the media by methods of contrasting political science linguistics. In Language of the media and politics, G.Ya. Solganik (Ed.). Moscow: Izd-vo Mosk. un-ta; Faculty of Journalism, Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov. 77-120. (In Russ.).
  9. Popova, L.E. (2005). Legal Discourse as Object of Interpretations. Krasnodar. (In Russ.).
  10. Viehweg, Theodor (1993). Topics and Law. Bonn, 1993.
  11. Soboleva, A.K. (1997). Theodor Fiveg and his book “Topeka and jurisprudence: to the question of the basic method of research in law”, Rhetoric, 1. Moscow. (In Russ.).
  12. Shirinkina, M.A. On some parameters of interpretative discourse in the field of law. URL: http://elar.urfu.ru/bitstream/10995/48997/1/iurg-2017-163-10.pdf (accessed: 23.02.2018). (In Russ.).
  13. Bilan, V.N. (1999). Official and diplomatic correspondence. Minsk. (In Russ.).
  14. Black's Law Dictionary. St. Paul. 1983. P. 473.
  15. Parshin, A. Theory and practice of translation Electronic resource. URL.: http://www.teneta.ru/ rus/pe/parshin-andteoria-i-praktika-perevoda.htm (accessed: 23.02.2018). (In Russ.).
  16. Pleshchenko, T.P., Fedotova, N.V. & Chechet, R.G. (1999). Fundamentals of stylistics and speech culture. Minsk: Tetra-Systems. (In Russ.).
  17. Kornev, V.A. Comparative semantics and problems of interlingual interference. Electronic resource. URL.: http://www.kcn.ru/tatru/science/news/lingv97/n42.htm (accessed: 23.02.2018). (In Russ.).
  18. Korobova, A.Yu. (1990). Investigation of the semantics of substantive lexicon with a parametric component in meaning (on the material of Russian and English languages) [dissertation]. Saratov. (In Russ.).
  19. Lukashuk, I.I. (1966). Parties in international treaties. Moscow. (In Russ.).
  20. Resolution 53/101 Principles and guidelines for international negotiations: Adopted by Gener. The Assembly, Dec. 8 1998. Electronic resource URL.: http://www.memo.ru/prawo/int-law/ int9812.htm (accessed: 23.02.2018).
  21. Lukashuk, I.I. (1997). International law. Moscow: Vek. (In Russ.).
  22. Ufimtseva, A.A. (1986). Lexical meaning: The principle of semiholes. description of vocabulary. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.).
  23. Functional styles of English (1981). Moscow.
  24. Talalaev, A.N. (1989). The law of international treaties: Treaties with the participation of the international. org. Moscow: Intern. relations. (In Russ.).
  25. Grekhneva, G.M. (1979). Features of logic as a quality of speech in the scientific style In Term and word: Interuniversity. B.N. Golovin (Ed.). Gorky. 165-174. (In Russ.).
  26. Kubryakova, E.S. (1965). What is word formation? Maitinskaya Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.).

Statistics

Views

Abstract - 845

PDF (English) - 896

Cited-By


PlumX

Dimensions


Copyright (c) 2018 Alontseva N.V., Ermoshin Y.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies