Major Translation Methods Used in Legal Documents: Translation of a Marriage Contract from Arabic into English

Abstract

Throughout history, the use of translation methods has constituted a source of lots of debates; some scholars advocate literal translation, others advocate free translation. In legal translation which is a special and specialized area of translational activity (Cao, 2007), and where documents are characterized by brevity, economy, and neatness to prevent fraud, additions, omissions or alterations in the text (Crystal & Davy, 1969), mistakes or mistranslations can lead to disastrous repercussions. The present study deals primarily with the methods that translators of legal texts follow and adopt when rendering a legal document. A concise account of translation theories that have been adopted and are still being applied to legal translation is offered to attempt to show the main views towards the application of such translation theories to legal translation. Major methods often used in the translation of legal documents are then presented, discussing their validity to legal translation. This presentation includes literal translation, free translation, the functional approach to translation, transliteration & transcription, loan translation, adaptation, description by definitions, lexical expansion, and descriptive substitution. The empirical part of this study is concerned with the analysis of a marriage contract translated from Arabic into English in an attempt to shed some light on the major methods adopted by the translator of this document and the reason behind using such methods.

The craft of translation: documentary practices within immigration advocacy in the United States

“…In exploring the craft of translation (Biguenet and Schulte, 1989) in contexts of legal advocacy, we problematize two pervasive accounts of translation. The first is the idea that translation is merely a process of finding equivalence across disparate but commensurate languages (El Ghazi and Bnini, 2019; Giordano, 2008). This notion of equivalence informs legal understandings of translation.…”

“…In contrast, scholars of translation have highlighted non‐equivalence, that is, the fact that there often is not an equivalent term in another language (Gal, 2015; Jiang and Zhuang, 2019), and also partial equivalence, that is, that it “will normally be necessary in legal translation to make formulation and word choices in accordance with an interpretation of the needs of the receiver” (Engberg, 2020, 269). These problems are exacerbated in legal translation, which may require translating not only between languages but also between legal systems (El Ghazi and Bnini, 2019; Zeifert and Tobor, 2021). There are debates over whether a translation should follow conventions of the source language or change syntax to meet expectations of the target language (see also Biel, 2017; Gal, 2015; El Ghazi and Bnini, 2019; Sorgoni, 2019).…”

“…As noted above, USCIS evidentiary policy adhered to an ideology of language equivalence according to which every statement in another language can be translated into a corresponding statement in English (El Ghazi and Bnini, 2019). 8 Title 8 (“Aliens and Nationality”) of the Code of Federal Regulations, section 103.2(b)(3) states:

(3) Translations .

…”

“…These problems are exacerbated in legal translation, which may require translating not only between languages but also between legal systems (El Ghazi and Bnini, 2019; Zeifert and Tobor, 2021). There are debates over whether a translation should follow conventions of the source language or change syntax to meet expectations of the target language (see also Biel, 2017; Gal, 2015; El Ghazi and Bnini, 2019; Sorgoni, 2019). Both approaches can occur in a single document translation, depending on the particular words and phrases encountered.…”

“…Second, even though only one individual certifies the translation, translation may be performed by a collectivity, in this case, both Susan and the attorney (Engberg, 2020). Third, translations can do justice to the original by striving to communicate authors’ intentions, even if that means exercising discretion in word choice (Biel, 2017; El Ghazi and Bnini, 2019; Engberg, 2020). Fourth, in advocacy contexts, a translation is performed with care.…”