Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (13) (remove)
Keywords
- Rechtssprache (13) (remove)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (3)
- Peer-Review (3)
Publisher
With recourse to a broader understanding of the concept of translation, the transfer of source texts in one variety into another variety of the same language can also be called translation. This paper focuses on the target language – or rather – the target variety “easy-to-read language”, which is meant to make texts comprehensible for people with communication limitations. Considering its origins in the disability rights movement, the aim is to inform affected persons about their rights and democratic processes, i.e. to translate especially legal texts into the so-called easy-to-read language. Although there is a whole range of rules and guidelines for formulating in easy-to-read language, ”none offers a sufficient approach for translation into easy-to-read language“ (Bredel & Maaß, 2016a, p. 109). Standardization of the variety is also still a long way off. On the one hand, the contribution takes stock of legal regulations in easy-to-read language. On the other hand, four versions of the Federal Participation Law in easy-to-read language are analysed with regard to their external features and the constructions used to explain technical terminology. The analysis shows that legal texts in easy-to-read language are (still) quite limited in number and are also difficult to find. Concerning the second part, the constructions used exhibit a great structural variance, both intra- and intertextually. It is therefore questionable whether the addressees can access the texts independently. Also, it is still necessary to make the rules, the formulations of the rules and the implementations clearer so that the translations fulfil their function.
Gegenstand ist eine vergleichende empirische Korpusstudie zur Bedeutung des Ausdrucks geschäftsmäßig im (bundesdeutschen) Gemeinsprach- und juristischen Fachsprachgebrauch. Die Studie illustriert an einem aktuellen Fall strittiger Wortdeutung (hier zu § 217 StGB) die Möglichkeiten computergestützter Sprachgebrauchsanalyse für die Auslegung vor Gericht und die Normtextprognose in der Rechtsetzung.
Anhand eines Fallbeispiels wird gezeigt, dass in der praktischen Arbeit des EuGH Rechtsarbeit und Spracharbeit eng miteinander verflochten sind. Wenn es in einem strittigen Fall um die konkrete Ausarbeitung einer haltbaren Sachverhaltsbeschreibung geht, zeigt sich, dass die Rechtsarbeit und die Spracharbeit des Gerichts eigentlich identisch sind. In einem solchen Fall ist es für das Gericht nützlich und günstig, wenn es auf so viele sprachliche Formulierungen (auch in verschiedenen Sprachen) zurückgreifen kann wie möglich. Das Ziel ist, möglichst viele Interpretationen in Betracht zu ziehen, um das Urteil bestandssicher zu machen. In dieser Situation sind Vorschläge, das Sprachenspektrum, in dem der EuGH arbeitet, im Vorhinein und generell einzuschränken, kontraproduktiv.
This paper presents a study on the comprehensibility of rephrased syntactic structures in German court decisions. While there are a number of studies using psycholinguistic methods to investigate the comprehensibility of original legal texts, we are not aware of any study looking into the effect resolving complex structures has on the comprehensibility. Our study combines three methodological steps. First, we analyse an annotated corpus of court decisions, press releases and newspaper reports on these decisions in order to detect those complex structures in the decisions which distinguish them from the other text types. Secondly, these structures are rephrased into two increasingly simple versions. Finally, all versions are subjected to a self paced reading experiment. The findings suggest that rephrasing greatly enhances the comprehensibility for the lay reader.
Kommunikation vor Gericht
(1986)