a) Antonymy is complete when the meaning of the antonymic pairs are totally opposite as: (diskriminim) negativ - (diskriminim) pozitiv, (gjobë) e rëndë - (gjobë) e lehtë, (gjykim me dyer) të hapura - (gjykim me dyer) të mbyllura, (servitud) aktiv - (servitud) pasiv, (e drejtë) absolute - (e drejtë) relative etc. and b) in a lower degree when the opposition is not complete as in the case of the fromation with the prefixes such as: jo, mos, pa for example (organ) gjyqësor - (organ) jogjyqësor, (vendim) përfundimtar - (vendim) jopërfundimtar, (ortak) statutor - (ortak) jostatutor, pasuri - jopasuri, zbatim (i një urdhërshërbimi) - moszbatim (i një urdhërshërbimi), dënim - mosdënim, (mocion) besimi - (mocion) mosbesimi, (send) i ndashëm - (send) i pandashëm etc. c) A term may be an antonym with some other terms in various degrees as monogami - bigami - poligami so, in this case the opposition increases and gets more complete from bigami to poligami. The degree of opposition is different between the terms as shtetësi - dyshtetësi -pashtetësi. There are cases when the same term enters in a opposite relation with terms of the same degree as (vendim) i ndërmjetëm - (vendim) përfundimtar - (vendim) jopërfundimtar. In the legalterminology there are also antonymic pairs that are realized in the preset contexts or determined lexical relations when out of them these pairs would not be the same for example (kontribut) në natyrë - (kontribut) në shërbime, (pagim) në natyrë - (pagim) me para, (dëm) material - (dëm) moral, (person) fizik - (person) moral etc.
Abstract. The various elements of the gender system have an impact on specialized areas of the language. Legalterminology is no exception, since the law covers almost all spheres of society. The interdisciplinary nature of gender studies has led to the demand for linguistic competence to study the gender construct, which has given rise to an independent discipline - linguistic genderology. In this regard, the problem of the influence of extralinguistic factors on the formation of legalterminology is relevant. In this paper linguistic research is conducted, within the framework of which Anglo-American legalterminology and its formation under the influence of gender factors are considered. The role of extra-linguistic factors in the formation of legal terms has been determined, the extra-linguistic factors affecting the gender markedness of the form and content of legal concepts have been identified. The method of continuous viewing of English legal texts, as well as English legal dictionaries, revealed gender-marked English-American legal terms and terminological concepts. The result of the study was the definition of a gender factor as a backbone for the Anglo-American legalterminology.
The translation of legalterminology faces various difficulties that affect the comprehensibility of legal text in the receptive language. This article will analyse the major problems related to the translation of legalterminology, by pointing out various errors that occur during this process through examples in Albanian. The problems associated with the translation of legalterminology will be analysed in two separate groups. First the problems that arise from the specificity of International Law will be analysed. The existence of different legal orders constitutes one of the main causes from where the controversy of concepts and legal institutions or their absence in different orders originates. Each state has its own legal system, therefore its own legalterminology, means that many referents (concepts and institutes) do not have equivalent terms in the language they enter. From this fact translation errors arise related to wrong neologisms or the use of terms that express only partially the meaning of the terms of the language from which they were borrowed. Secondly, the problems arising from language will be analysed, referring to the relationship between the word and concept that varies in different languages. In this case, examples will highlight the positive or negative connotations of some terms, which have affected the choices of terminology in various occasions and in different periods of time. We will also emphasize through examples the ways in which the entirety of meanings of legal terms affects not only the ability to translate them but also the linguistic transparency. At the end we will present findings concerning the problems arising during the process of translation as well as the possible solutions to avoid errors encountered in the translation of legalterminology.
When used in a legal context, many common English words and phrases take on a different shade of meaning than in their ordinary usage. The word injury, for example, ordinarily refers to some sort of physical harm done to the body. In legal usage, however, injury has the broader meaning of an invasion of legal rights that adversely affects a person’s body, property, or reputation. Loss, harm, or hurt that results from an injury is known, in legal terms, as damage. An act or failure to act that infringes on the rights of another person and causes damage to that person is known as a wrongful act. Exceptions are often made when a person inflicts dam- age in the exercise of an equal or superior right, as in the case of self-defense against an attacker.
The objective of the LexALP project is to com- pare the specialised terminology of six different national legal systems and three supranational sys- tems in four different languages, and to harmonise it, thus optimising communication between the Alpine states at supranational level. To achieve this objective, the terminology of the Alpine Con- vention is described and compared to the equiva- lent terms used in national legislation. The result- ing terminology entries feed a specific term bank that will support the harmonisation work.
In 1999, the American Bar Association  sponsored a national survey on at- titudes towards the legal system and knowledge of basic legal concepts of 1000 randomly selected participants. Researchers found that 33% of the respondents believed that the defendant in a trial had to prove his or her innocence rather than the prosecutor, state, or people having to prove a defendant guilty. In a summary of articles by Imwinkelried and Schwed , their review of the re- search on juror comprehension has clearly shown that the average juror in criminal cases comprehends approximately 50% of the concepts associated with criminal instructions. Yet, in a national poll conducted in the United States on juror duty, it was found that 50% of the jurors who were called to duty actually showed up, while 92% of participants polled thought that jury duty was an im- portant social obligation . When only 50% of the potential jurors actually show up for jury duty and jurors on average only comprehend 50% of the legalterminology, this would suggest that the legal system’s use of jurors may not be fair towards individuals accused of criminal acts.
WP 1 – Project Management coordination, reporting, internal communication WP 2 - Web Service Development technical development, fine-tuning of web services WP 3 – LegalTerminology and Workflow processes, data, best practices – analysis and solutions WP 4 – Evaluation and Validation users, quality – user group “driving” the project
woodpeckers. This is one of many examples of the impossibility of organising lexical and termi- nological synsets in independent networks. On the other hand, to distinguish terminology from gen- eral language, terms are often linked by several domain relations to synsets which refer to certain domains. Such relations signal that some synsets (e.g., atom) are members of the domains named by other synsets (e.g., physics, chemistry). This rela- tion has three types: topic, region and usage.
Language reflects all the changes taking place in society, including professional fields. Professional activity is expressed by means of a special language, that is, terminology, which is a part of the general literary language. Terminology is characterised by both general linguistic and specific patterns and processes. Like a word, a term is a component of the lexical system of national language that has a nominative function. According to scholars (Danilenko, 1977; Lotte, 1982; Kandelaki, 1977; Kapanadze, 1965; Reformatskii,1968 and others), the main differentiating feature of terms is their connection with a special concept, that is, a term is a means of expressing scientific, technical and productive concepts. Consequently, terms, unlike ordinary words, have many specific characteristics caused by this feature, including unambiguity, the lack of imagery, emotiveness, expressiveness, metaphorical use, the lack of synonyms, unified use, and consistency. At the same time, terminology researchers (for example, S. Fernandez-Silvia) highlight the variability of terms due to the text genre (Fernandez-Silvia, 2013).
The intention of this research is to inspire a discussion about the changes in architecture termi- nology with the revolution in communication and representation forms as a result of digitalisation. The blurred boundary between the virtual and the analogue worlds, the misunderstandings and the confusion that appear with the interaction of these two worlds nowadays form the major problems facing architectural design, education and research. The researchers in this field are focused on the interface, the meeting and the transformation point between the digital and analogue worlds in order to prevent those problems and confusions. One of the main reasons of this ambiguity is the architectural terminology that changes according to the changing status of architectural representation i.e. new forms of representation; new forms of communication i.e. the new role of the architect and the researcher.
It is interesting that for both Recipient of care and Subject of information, actual clinical statements concern real people, and specific data about these people would be derived largely from an information model. It may be then that the difficulties with interpreting Recipient of care and Subject of information result from a lack of a clarity in what should form part of a terminology model and what should belong to an
The first thing to notice from this figure is that precision scores on the left-hand side tend to be far worse than the recall scores on the right-hand side. This means that all three methods produce a considerable amount of false positives, unfortunately. Our method (ONGOING), however produces the highest recall of all three methods by far, and while fluctuating, the recall trend is slightly on the increase. Compare this performance to that of B2-STATIC, the SVM trained on the first batch and used to extract terms in all subsequent batches with no retraining after each validation. Recall in B2-STATIC performs very well at the beginning (matching ONGOING), but it sinks to the bottom very quickly and largely remains there. This shows that the retraining conducted after each validation is indeed keeping the ONGO- ING classifier sensitive to new terms. If this retraining stops, the performance drops. So, a terminology extractor trained on a static set of data will not be able to perform well in the long run.
– the official commissioning of a system of terms by an authoritative group of experts having high competence in this field of science or industry, having the corresponding rights as the organization of standards. The final stage of terms ordering in the terminology system is its compilation in the form of a standard dictionary. The various kinds of dictionaries creation is an important work in the field of terminology and its more particular branch – terminography, which is aimed at the multi-purpose databases serving as an information resource formation and as a tool for a specific terminology field presentation, and, consequently, for clarifying the object-terms characteristics from the point of view of their position in the terminology system, taking into account their national cultural specifics.