Rainer Langenhan von Handakte WebLAWg erwähnt einen Artikel von Eva Wiesmann (bei JurPC) zu JUSLEX, einem Terminologiesystem, das sie an den Universitäten Mainz und Bologna entwickelt hat. JUSLEX soll vor allem Übersetzern helfen und soll mehr Informationen enthalten als manche Terminologiedatenbanken.
The above links are to an article in German about a newly developed legal terminology database (system) for translators and others dealing with legal terminology on an international basis. Eva Wiesmann apparently created a pilot version as part of her Ph.D. work in translation at Mainz-Germersheim and Bologna University. The Ph.D. has been published in the Günter Narr Verlag:
Eva Wiesmann
Rechtsübersetzung und Hilfsmittel zur Translation
Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen und computergestützte Umsetzung eines lexikographischen Konzepts
Forum für Fachsprachen-Forschung 65, 2004, XIV, 485 Seiten, [D] 98,/SFr 155, ISBN 3-8233-6107-4 (GNV)
I was disappointed not to find an example of Jurlex running anywhere. However, the article describes some of what Jurlex does – see continuation for a quotation.
German terms always state whether D, AT, CH, IT or whatever.
± / ÜV (Übersetzungsvorschlag) indicates approximate equivalents.
Definitions are followed by extra information placing a work in context (e.g. in the example below, the types of company).
Phraseology is included
Collocations are given.
I haven’t read the whole article and understood the difference in approach to Sandrini (a lot of work has been done on DE>ITMayer and others in Bolzano). I haven’t quite understood why the project is designed to help both lawyers and non-lawyer translation students (I don’t think universities like Mainz teach very much legal translation). It teaches students about legal terminology and law too.
The present situation in legal translation is that many translators call for more detailed dictionaries, but most of us have to do all our own research on law and terminology, since there is no completely reliable bilingual source. We also need to know the law in order to know, when our source text is badly expressed, what it was intended to mean. People often don’t consult dictionaries before they speak or write. Do we want a hugely detailed database designed for comparative law? Yes, probably we do. If it is designed for translating between German and Italian, will its German or Italian entries be sufficient for working into or out of another language? Possibly not.
At all events, Juslex would do what most legal translators spend their lives doing, reinventing the wheel. Continue reading →