Variety of word meanings: synonymy in legal contexts

Every lexical word has a particular meaning. Meaning is “the thing or idea that a word, expression, or sign represents”.15 Meaning is what a word refers to in the real or imaginary world. The same word often has several different references, dependent on the context where this word appears; but also, the same, or nearly same, meaning can be conveyed in different ways, by different words or lexical units. Moreover, the same word or the same lexical item may have two or more meanings. Most words in most languages have synonyms. Depending on the situation, we prefer certain words over their synonyms. At the same time, it is correct

15

70

to claim that every lexical item has one and only one meaning in the particular context in which it occurs. Therefore, in the following the term “synonym” is used in the sense “near- synonym”, taking into consideration the fact that perfect synonyms hardly exist. When it comes to translation, it is a challenge to convey this interplay between word, reference and context. In legal translation, as in most technical translations, the use of synonymy is very restricted. An existing term cannot be substituted with a synonymous word. Once an equivalent has been selected, the same term must be repeated though the rest of the text, in order to avoid confusion. If a legal translation has the status of an authenticated text, “the language therein has the status of a precedent” (Šarčević 1997: 118). Verbs and prepositions are among those few word classes where, to a certain degree, a so-called free translation approach can be applied. Among the reasons of why some creativity may be needed in legal translation, the following have been pointed out: transfer of the sense of the original as precisely as possible, respect for the genius of the target language, and the intention of achievement of certain legal effects (ibid. 119). I would like to add a fourth reason, which involves plain language considerations: Where possible, a translator’s creativity can be used to make a legal text more comprehensive for a lay public.

The study of meanings is central to the field of semantics. There are different views on the classification of the notion “meaning” into several types. The most important division is two- fold: descriptive and non-descriptive kinds of meaning (Cruse 2000: 46). The former is the most basic type of meaning. It is also referred to as “ideational”, “referential”, “logical” or “propositional” (ibid.) Descriptive meaning or descriptive information is identified in earlier studies by Lyons (1984: 50): “it can be explicitly asserted or denied and, in the most

favourable instances at least, it can be objectively verified”. This type of meaning has to do with the truth or falseness of what is said. All other types of meaning are of the non-

descriptive type, and among them are expressive meaning and evoked meaning. The former has to do with emotional state, which is normally not relevant in the case of legal documents. The latter, on the other hand, is relevant for this study. Evoked meaning has to do with the subject of communication. Evoked meaning appears for example in connection with a particular dialect (related to geography, age or social class) or in connection with a particular register. The expressive meaning is hidden in the individual character of a particular word, chosen out of a number of descriptive synonyms. Thus, synonyms are words with more or less the same descriptive meaning. The non-descriptive meaning(s) expresses those slight differences that make a competent language user make appropriate choices and, for a

71

particular context, choose the most appropriate word from a range of synonyms. In this section, the focus is put on the expressive meaning of words peculiar to legal language. To illustrate very briefly the difference between hyponymous and synonymous relationships between verbs, an example from Lyons (1984: 292) will be used. “Hyponym” is a term describing an “asymmetrical” relation between words, as opposed to the “symmetrical” relation described by the term “synonyms” (ibid.). For verbs, there are general words such as get which have a number of hyponyms appropriate for more specified contexts, e.g. buy, borrow, win, catch, find, grasp, etc. These words have an asymmetrical relation with the superordinate verb to get. However, these verbs are not synonymous. The verb to obtain would almost always, but to varying degrees, be synonymous with the verb to get. These two verbs differ in their level of formality. Thus, it is synonymous relationships that are of interest in my study.

The process of assessment of the expressive meaning of words will involve stylistic scales. Following Newmark (1987: 14), three types of stylistic scales can be applied to assign a piece of language to a particular style. First, there is “the scale of formality”:

Taboo – slang – colloquial – informal – neutral – formal – official – officialese.

The part of the stylistic scale relevant for this study stretches from the point “neutral” to “officialese”. The types on the opposite side from neutral, i.e. informal, colloquial, slang and taboo, are not represented by the language in the documents in question.

Next, there is “the scale of generality or difficulty”:

Simple – popular – neutral – educated - technical – opaquely technical.

As for this scale, the four categories from ‘neutral’ to ‘opaquely technical’ may be relevant for the words in Tables A, B and C. “Neutral”, in terms of difficulty, covers a type of language where basic vocabulary only is used, while ‘opaquely technical’ covers a type of language that is comprehensible only to an expert.

The third scale is called “the scale of emotional tone”:

72

The language of legal documents is supposed to keep a serious tone, which corresponds to the scale points ‘factual’ and ‘understatement’.

Work on synonymy in translation requires consideration of a text with respect to the

referential level. A translator must find out what is the intention of the source text (ST), what the text is about, and so on. As a preliminary task before translation of any technical text, Newmark (1987: 21) recommends answering the following questions: What is the register of language in the text? What is the tone? Are there any words or passages that are particularly difficult?