Legal Linguistics; Corpus Linguistics;

Since the publication of the first edition of English for Law in 2018 the world that we live in has undergone a great many transformations. From the Trump presidency in the United States of America to the pandemic that still holds its deathly grip on much of the world at the time of writing, we have been living through strange and challenging times. One the most important of these changes, however, that has particularly affected Italy, the European Union and the entire world, has been the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union. When the first edition was published the final outcomes of the Brexit process were still unknown. Over the course of the last three years agreements were reached that will have far-reaching effects for many years to come. While the UK no longer falls under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, it remains a contracting State under the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Despite rumors and fears of the contrary, English still remains one of the official languages of the EU sharing the position of “procedural language” together with French and German. While the future of English within the EU and its institutions is unknown, it is safe to say the language will remain a lingua franca within EU institutions and in its Member States for many years to come. Moreover, the UK’s almost fifty-year presence in the EU has left its mark on the language of the EU and the institutions themselves. The same could be said of the UK considering that most EU legislations was converted into UK law before the official withdrawal.

In this new edition I have attempted to correct the mistakes that remained in the first version. I would like to thank the attentive readers who pointed out many of these to me hoping that I have managed to rectify all of these shortcomings in the new edition. Secondly, I have updated some sections in the theoretical part of the book to address the changed role of the UK in the European Union. Thirdly, an entirely new section about the main differences between the common law and (European) civil law has been added. Finally, I have expanded the section on contracts. It is hoped that these additions will be useful to Italian learners who would like to learn more about the Anglo-American legal system but through the lens of their own legal system and that in the European Union. The methodology of the book remains unaltered: the theoretical sections are complemented by the practical chapters in the second part of the book. During the preparation of this second edition I continued to draw inspiration from all of my students and colleagues in Italy and in Europe.

This chapter focuses on the ways that newspaper producers and readers represented the Italian justice system and its criminal procedure through the various phases of Amanda Knox's arrest, trial, conviction, acquittal, and retrial (in absentia). Specifically, it considers how news readers textually interacted with and reacted to articles dealing with the case through the online comment function. The work aims to demonstrate how text producers (the media and text commenters) selectively recontextualise and possibly transform elements of the case based on previous versions recounted by the media. A quantitative analysis exploits tools from Corpus Linguistics in order to determine the specific legal lexical representations in a number of different corpora of both newspaper articles and comments from different periods of the case.

Sachsenspiegel und Magdeburger Recht stellen zwei deutschsprachigen Rechtsquellen dar, die mit der Verbreitung der deutschen Rechtspraxis in den slawisch- und baltischsprachigen Gebieten angeeignet wurden. Der vorliegende Beitrag konzentriert sich auf ihre Rezeption in der Frühen Neuzeit bzw. Moderne sowie deren Auswirkungen auf die Modernisierung, Kodifikation bzw. Erfindung der Rechtssprache in der Zielsprache Russisch und Lettisch. Sypmthomatisch ist, dass die Übersetzungen des sächsisch-magdeburgischen Rechts in beide Sprachen eine Weiche in der Entwicklung der Rechtssprache als funktionaler Domäne setzt, weil sie jeweils in der Zeit ihrer Neugestaltung erfolgte. Am Beispiel der Übersetzungen des Sachsenspiegels und Magdeburger Rechts ins Russische (entsprechend 1732 und 1735), auf ihrer Grundlage entstandenen Uloženie (1743) für Malorossija und der Urkunde zu den Rechten und Privilegien für die Städte des Russischen Imperiums (1785) sowie des lettischen Zivilgesetzes (1937) wird der Einfluss ihrer fremdsprachlichen Vorlagen auf die Rechtssprache als funktionalen Register gezeigt. Berücksichtigt werden sowohl die Rechtsterminologie und Rechtsformeln als auch Mehrworteinheiten, die statistisch ermittelt werden. Außerdem wird die Terminolgiedatenbank aufgrund der Quellen des sächsisch-magdeburger Rechts vorgestellt, ihre Zusammensetzung und Online-Darstellung diskutiert und Problematik der Archaismen darin eingegangen.

We will explore the possibility of shifting from a do-it-yourself (DIY) towards a do-it-together (DIT) approach in corpus creation, as well as in the way translators use and share sources, resources and tools. Building on previous research on current trends and future perspectives in translation aids, we suggest moving towards collaboration by means of a one-stop DIT site aimed not only at corpus creation, design and analysis, but also at sharing translation aids. In order to test this approach, we have defined and analyzed a specific translation scenario—that of Uruguayan English-Spanish certified translators—and a translation brief. We have anticipated some of the problems our end users could encounter when translating, and looked for solutions and different translation options using a corpus-based approach. Testing the usefulness and feasibility of this approach for legal translation has, in turn, helped us predict if our end users would be interested in creating DIT corpora and participating in a collaborative site in the future. Even though we have not been able to fully test this approach, the perspectives are quite optimistic and future lines of research are suggested.

Communication (21/03/2022) à l'atelier "Computational approaches to law », organisé de manière jumelée par le projet ANR GoA, hébergé à l'Institut d'Histoire et Philosophie des Sciences et des Techniques (IHPST), le Département DreDIS de l'Institut de Recherche Juridique de la Sorbonne (IRJS) et le Carl von Weizsäcker-Zentrum de l'Université de Tübingen.

Статья направлена на сравнение списков значимой лексики (resp. списков ключевых слов), полученных с использованием двух разных по содержанию референтных корпусов одинакового объёма (по 1 млн. слов).
Целевой корпус – это лемматизированнная субколлекция текстов русских локальных документов типа «Информированное добровольное согласие на медицинское вмешательство» (38,5 тыс. слов). Коллекция входит в состав Корпуса русских локальных документов и актов CorRIDA.
Референтными корпусами являются оффлайновые версии НКРЯ и ГИКРЯ со снятой грамматической омонимией.
Выяснилось, что «верхушки» двух списков «положительных» ключевых слов очень схожи, а сами ключевые слова отражают прежде «о-чёмность» («aboutness») текстов.

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to examine the rhetorical, political speeches of Julian the emperor using computational tools. For this reason, in this research we apply corpus linguistics techniques for the automatic extraction of word, collocation lists and lexical bundles from Julian’s speeches; using corpus linguistics techniques we will draw conclusions about his style and character.

KEYWORDS

Byzantine Greek Literature, Corpus Linguistics, Stylistics, Rhetorical and political speeches.