General questions
 About me
 Legal terminology
 Resources

General observations on legal terminology

In many fields of specialist translation, there is only one correct choice for words which are to be translated. For example, the equivalent of the word "zaag" is "saw". In legal translation, there is often not such a degree of equivalence.

The choice to be made when translating, for instance, such a basic word as "advocaat" illustrates this. In England, there is a strict division between "barristers" and "solicitors". However, the work of an "advocaat" in the Netherlands may be that of either a "barrister" or a "solicitor". "Solicitors" are the lawyers who do the bulk of the legal work in England, but except in minor cases, they do not appear in court, indeed, they are not allowed to. If a court action between parties has become inevitable, a solicitor has to contact a barrister. Barristers appear in court.
In translations, I tend to avoid making a choice by using the more general word "lawyer", but sometimes, if the role of an "advocaat" in a particular case is very clear, I may choose the appropriate English profession. A client may also have their own preferences.
Similar issues arise for the professions "procureur", "jurist" and also "notaris". In other words, the divisions within the Dutch legal profession are, as is well-known, different from the divisions within the English legal profession. Americans have, I believe, fewer distinct categories of lawyers.

This immediately leads me to the next issue facing legal translators. Not only is there often no equivalence between a Dutch legal term and a legal term of British English, there are also notable differences in the meaning of terms between the various English-speaking groups. I myself am most familiar with British legal terminology, as I have an English law degree, and with the terminology used within the EU.
Let me begin by giving an example of terminology specific to EU English. In EU texts, the word "undertaking" is often used where British and American English would use "enterprise". On this point, I do not use the EU English term, but on many other points, I believe that EU English provides very good options and makes it possible to avoid terms peculiar to the UK. See also my notes under Resources, Books.

An important difference in meaning between British and American legal English can be found in the word "bailiff". Bailiff is the normal translation of the word "deurwaarder" in British legal English. However, in American courts, a bailiff is in charge of keeping order in the court, which would be an usher in British English and a "zaalwachter" in Dutch. Needless to say; a totally different occupation! If I am not sure about the native language of the reader(s) of my translation, I use the word "process server". This is the normal word in American English for this profession, but for British lawyers it is also clear.

Finally, there is English legal terminology which has become customary in Dutch legal circles. For instance, "kort geding" is sometimes translated as "summary proceedings". This choice is made because, at first glance, the words seem similar. However, the term is likely to confuse British and American lawyers; in British legal English, the word "summary" is used, amongst others, in connection with an undefended action [Read more under: Kort geding/Interim proceedings].

(c) Nothing on this site may be copied without the express permission of the author.

Home