1. PROBLEMAS DE
TRADUCCIÓN
Diferencias entre Traducción Jurídica y
Traducción Técnica, Científica, etc.

2. • A diferencia de realidades como los elementos químicos o las
reglas de la física, que coinciden más o menos universalmente
en todas las comunidades según el nivel de conocimiento de
la materia, los conceptos, la terminología y las mismas
realidades jurídicas se corresponden sólo en parte de una
sociedad a otra. Cuando decimos en parte, nos referimos a
que ciertos conceptos pueden coincidir plenamente ( con o sin
diferencias de terminología, por supuesto), algunos existen en
una sociedad y no aparecen bajo ninguna forma en la otra,
mientras que otros se corresponden, pero sólo hasta cierto
punto, en las dos sociedades.

3. • Problems faced by the legal
translator
1.Lack of knowledge of the terminology and
phraseology (USM Units of specialized meaning)
used in the text or which ought to be used therein
(in the case of the wording of the translation,
given that the future reader has expectations in
that respect).

4. • 2. A lack of knowledge of the characteristic traits that give
the text substance, such as the branch of law to which it
corresponds, the textual genre to which it belongs ( its usual
macroestructure), the main function to be expected, etc.
• 3. A lack of knowledge of the figures involves: the individuals
who or agents that feature or may feature in the legal context
of the text (courts, civil service, lawyers, second or third
parties, applicable legislation, etc). Legal texts have a high
level of intertextuality, and it is usually tacit. For ex., it is
common for there to be no reference to the legislation or
precedent that is relevant to a particular text, but it is
assumed that the target of the text possesses knowledge
thereof.

5. • 4. A lack of knowledge of the possible legal consequences
arising from the text. Texts that require the person at whom
they are aimed to respond or act in a specific manner, texts
that involve action form third parties, texts that are
provisional or not final.
It is not enouth for the translator to be familiar with the two
legal contexts involved (which, for each language and its
corresponding legal system, will include the four problem areas
referred to above). The translator needs to take a broader
universe into account, namely the context of translation, the
communicative situation in which it arises, whether a translated
document or target text is to be legally valid in the tartget
language/legal system or whether a translation is being
undertaken for informative purposes, etc.

6. • The most appropriate type of equivalence will be opted for :
• 1. On a lexical level
• 2. On a sentence level
• 3. On a textual level
1. Lexical level
• a) A legal equivalent (is held to mean equivalency established
between two terms that represent two similar concepts in each of
the legal systems (separation agreement, acuerdo de división de
bienes, convenio regulador.
• b) A contextual equivalent (refers to the case of the term in the source
language having different possible equivalents in the target language
depending on the context in which it is used ( e.g. attorney can be the
equivalent of abogado, apoderado, Fiscal General de Estado).
• c) Lexical translation consists of suggesting a loan translation of a term
in the source language when there is no equivalent thereof in the target
legal system ( The Business Namens Act- Ley de Nombres de Empresas,
Sociedades)

7. • d) Periphrastic translation involves explaining a source language term in
the target text
• (joint venture, unión de dos o más empresas…..)
• 2. Sentence level (phraseologically functional equivalencies,
collocations, etc).
• 3. Textual level ( reproducing the specific characteristics of the
macrostructure and adaptation to the particular
characteristics of the genre in the target legal system, etc.)

8. • The legal translator is constantly faced with translation
situations that require the following three facets: a)
knowledge of the four problem areas in the language and legal
system corresponding to the original text; b) knowledge of the
four problem area in the language and the legal system
corresponding to the target text, which implies being able to
think of the closest situation possible to that to which the
original text refers in the the target language and legal system;
c) reflection and decision making in order to select the most
appropriate type of equivalency on lexical, sentence and
textual levels.

9. • Equivalencia Funcional
• Cualidad de una traducción en la que el mensaje del TO ha
sido transferido a la lengua receptora de tal modo que la
respuesta del receptor es esencialmente igual que la de los
receptores originales.
• En la mayoría de los casos es el método o procedimiento más
adecuado en traducción jurídica, no siempre aplicable
estrictamente.
• Como alternativas (según Weston)
• - Traducción palabra por palabra si nos ofrece una
equivalencia funcional

10. • - Traducción no literal, que representa una equivalencia
funcional en la LM (High School Escuela Secundaria)
• - Traducción palabra por palabra o no literal, que representa
una equivalencia semántica, pero que no existe como un
referente cultural equivalente en la LM;
• - Transcripción, con o sin glosas (a veces necesaria, de
cualquier forma, para lectores especializados);
• - Neologismo
• - Explicación /definición
• Otro elemento de importancia
• Transparencia

11. • Si se vuelve a traducir o retro-traducir el documento debe ser
posible reconocer e identificar los términos originales.
• Ministerio de Educacion- Department of Education-
Departamento de Educación
• Adopción Simple, Adopción Plena. En inglés solo existe
Adoption

12. • Example from Academic Documents
• The client who requires the translation of this type of
document is usually applying for the recognition of his/her
studies in an English speaking country. Besides recognition,
other reasosn given for such trnaslations are applications for
grants, research posts or a place on a postgraduate course. In
all of these cases, the client´s future may hinge on the correct,
or sometimes, incorrect representation of his/her studies.

13. • Qualifications
• When concepts in the SL culture do not have exact equivalents in
the TL culture the translator must opt for a multiple system of
translation which must include lexical borrowing of the original term
and a definition, normally enclosed in square brackets to denote
that it is the translator who is giving this information.
• Licenciatura en Filología Inglesa
• Basic information to be included in the translation
• a) Duration of the course of studies (important in recognition or
access to postgraduate studies
• b) Level (whether the studies are considered as undergraduate or
postgraduate in SL)
• c) Content refers to the name of the course

14. • 1. Formal equivalents (literal, no lexical borrowing)
• Licentiate in English Philology
• A licentiate is defined as a degree situated between that
of a bachelor and a doctor which is only awarded by European
universities (Collins 1994)
• 2. Dynamic equivalents (No lexical borrowing)
• Bachelor in English Philology
• (It is not part of the translator´s responsibility to recognise and
award the qualification of bachelor as defined as a person
who holds the degree of Bachelor of Arts, etc.).
• 3. A compromise choosing the best alternative in each unit

15. • A five* year undergraduate course in English Philology
• A final version would be a mixture of lexical borrowing and
definition, including the term ¨degree¨ which is defined as «an
academic award conferred by a university or college on
successful completion of a course»
• Licentciatura en Filología Inglesa [ a degree awarded after a
five year undergraduate course of study in English Philology]