Präzision versus Vagheit

Abstract

The contrast between precision and indeterminacy is an intrinsic feature of legal language. Specialist communication, and legal language has to be regarded as such, aims at utmost precision to avoid any form of ambiguity. On the other hand, laws and statutes define general rules for citizens and must be comprehensible to all. Moreover, they have to be adapted to changing social realities. All this leads to varying degrees of indeterminacy in the different legal systems. The paper describes indeterminacy in legal language and proposes ways to handle this problem with regard to the management of multilingual terminology as well as to the translation of legal texts. With respect to the former (manifesting as the lack of equivalence between concepts form different legal systems), the suggestion is for a terminographical methodology derived from principles of comparative. For the latter (translation) the importance of a harmonisation of law is stressed which implies a harmonisation of legal concepts and eventually a harmonisation of terms.

New Insights into the Semantics of Legal Concepts and the Legal Dictionary

“…By the 17th century, the above mentioned doctrine of stare decisis became the practice of both common law courts and courts of equity. In 1875 the common law courts and the courts of equity were fused into one court that applied both rule of law and rule of equity (for more see Beveridge 2002). It is interesting to note that this historic distinction between law and equity is still maintained in the United States (although it also no longer has separate courts for cases decided based on equity as opposed to law) as the Seventh Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees a right to trial by jury in a civil case "in Suits at common law" (Nedzel 2008: 17).…”