Angewandte Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Book (141)
- Part of a Book (32)
- Part of Periodical (24)
- Article (22)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Report (1)
- Review (1)
Keywords
- Deutsch (222) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Zweitveröffentlichung (23)
- Veröffentlichungsversion (18)
- Postprint (4)
Reviewstate
Publisher
- Weidmann (38)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (34)
- de Gruyter (21)
- Huhle (9)
- R. Oldenbourg (9)
- Volk und Wissen Verlags-G.M.B.H. (7)
- Weidmann - Greven (7)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (5)
- Seidel (5)
- Peter Lang (4)
Im Streit um Migration soll der Gebrauch von Disclaimern in erster Linie ein positives Bild des Produzenten liefern oder wenigstens Ansprüche auf die Berechtigung seiner kritischen Stellungnahme erheben, ohne dass der Produzent als Rassist abgestempelt wird. Im vorliegenden Beitrag werden die Ergebnisse einer Fallstudie über den Gebrauch eines solchen Disclaimers in Deutschland und in Italien zusammengefasst, nämlich von „Ich bin kein Rassist, aber“ und seiner italienischen Entsprechung „Non sono razzista, ma“. Es wird gezeigt, (i) wie diese Disclaimer zum Ausdruck ausländerkritischer Stellungnahmen verwendet werden und (ii) wie ihre Verwendung in der Öffentlichkeit wahrgenommen wird.
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.