Akademisk avhandling--Gothenburg. / Extra t.p., with thesis statement, inserted. Bibliography: p. iv-ix.

Akademisk avhandling--Gothenburg. / Extra t.p., with thesis statement, inserted. Bibliography: p. iv-ix.

This thesis explores the role and impact of Rannóg an Aistriúcháin - the Oireachtas Government Translation section - on English-Irish legal translation and terminology, with particular focus on the period 1922-1937; a period bookended by the establishment of the Irish Free State and the enactment of Bunreacht na hÉireann (the Constitution of Ireland) in 1937. It aims to assess the efficacy and consistency of the translation strategies and Irish legal terms employed by Rannóg an Aistriúcháin, and to investigate how modern translation theory – specifically equivalence theory – may be applied to English-Irish legal translation as a whole. While a semantic study of the English and Irish versions of the amended 1937 Constitution has previously been carried out (Ó Cearúil, 1999), there has yet to be any specific study of other translated English-Irish legislative material within the Irish Free State or, indeed, of any laws translated within the Rannóg. This is an area which holds great research potential as regards assessing the efficacy of a particular body of translations, as the position of the Irish language in the Republic of Ireland is a unique one. Not only is Irish an official language of the European Union, but it enjoys constitutional status as the National and First Official language of the Republic of Ireland, with Article 25.4.6o of the Irish Constitution 1937 providing that: ‘In case of conflict between the texts of a law enrolled under this section in both the official languages, the text in the national language shall prevail’. In other words, should the Irish translation deviate in any way from its English legislative counterpart, it is the Gaelic translated legislation - along with all its construed connotations and associations - which has the upper hand. With this reasoning in mind, this thesis takes a corpus of EN-GA legislative material translated by Rannóg an Aistriúcháin during the period 1922-1937, from which legal terms are chosen for analysis and qualitatively and semantically assessed in the context of Equivalence translation theory and legal translation. Ultimately, this thesis provides a new critical assessment of the reliability of Irish language legal terminology in primary legislation from this period; an analysis of how Equivalence theory may be applied to EN-GA legal translation as a whole; and provides some guidelines for future endeavours in English-Irish legal translation and terminology.

Language ability can be a determining factor in deciding a defendant's legal guilt or innocence. This was the case for Chinese immigrant, LK, a licensed gun dealer who was criminally charged with selling weapons to ineligible buyers. In his defense, LK claimed that, as an English language learner, he did not possess the sufficient language skills required to adequately complete the complex administrative forms that accompany gun purchases. This study explores whether the defendant's English language abilities were sufficient to understand the government's requisite weapon sales report forms.Data collection comes from three sources: audio body bug (wiretap) tapes, written court transcripts, and the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms' sales transaction forms. Using these sources as a basis for analysis, this study examines key linguistic features of the defendant's speech to evaluate his English language proficiency. Additionally, the language used by the defendant will be compared with the language found in the weapons purchase application report.Drawing upon theories on communicative competence (Bachman, 1990; Bachman & Palmer, 1996; Canale & Swain, 1980; Canale, 1983; Savignon, 1997), LK's functional, linguistic, discourse, sociolinguistic, and strategic competencies will first be evaluated. The second phase of the analysis uses the insight gained from examining LK's competencies in order to determine his level of proficiency. The Speaking Proficiency English Assessment Kit (1996, SPEAK®) test and the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) Proficiency Guidelines (2000) will be used. The third stage of the analysis turns to readability studies in order to determine the level of difficulty in the ATF form. Chall et al.'s (1996) rubric and Flesch's readability formula (1946, 1949, 1972, 1979) serve as the foundation for the readability assessment. And last, additional areas for a forensic linguistic investigation into this case are considered. These include thematic (topical) tracking, sociolinguistic practices, and speech accommodation.This research serves those interested in second language issues as well as members of the judicial system. It builds on and supports other work in linguistics, language acquisition, sociolinguistcs, as well as the more specialized field of forensic linguistics.

No description available.

The thesis offers a comparative analysis of language policies in the EU and India. Specifically, it examines the role of power and ideology in the formulation and implementation of language policies. The need for this thesis emerged in view of the lack of comprehensive comparative analyses of language policies which leads to epistemological gaps, including one-dimensional narratives of language policies, and theories which are lacking in precision. In light of these gaps, the thesis undertakes a comprehensive investigation of policies in eight policy domains (administration, legal safeguards for minority languages, law, education, media, healthcare, business, and social welfare) in the EU and India and in two case studies each from the EU (Luxembourg, Wales), and India (Manipur, Tamil Nadu), chosen on the basis of maximum and minimum deviation from the EU's and Indian policies. The study examines policy texts (statutes on language use in these polities), and contexts which concern the historical and socio-political factors underpinning language policies. The thesis makes three important contributions. First, it marks a break from the prevalent understanding of power in macro-level policymaking. Research to date has tended to view power as a monolithic entity, while this thesis offers evidence that power and ideology are not uniform across policy domains. Second, it bridges the text-context divide of language policy research by conducting an investigation of policy-related legislation, and highlighting the importance of texts in understanding language policies, as they reflect the changes in power structures through time. Third, the thesis proposes a new analytical concept for investigating language policies, Categories of Differentiation (COD). Categories of Differentiation refer to the sets of binaries which underpin language policies in the aforementioned case studies. These binaries include the hills-valley divide (Manipur), the Dravidian-Aryan divide (Tamil Nadu), and the autochthonous-allochthonous divide (EU) among others. Language policies have often been described as 'multilayered', and COD offer a systematic approach to exploring these multiple layers. Overall, the thesis demonstrates how comparative research aids understanding of language policies, and sets out a possible theoretical framework for conducting it.

La thèse est le résultat d’une recherche menée en sciences du langage : lexicologie, sémantique lexicale et analyse du discours. Elle s’appuie sur les sources primaires du droit de l’Union, les sources doctrinales de la Doctrine Sociale de l’Eglise et des corpus de textes doctrinaux (juridiques allemands), ainsi que sur une relecture de sources philosophiques : aristotélisme, thomisme, kantisme et romantisme allemand. Il est généralement avancé par la doctrine juridique européenne (en France, MILLON-DELSOL, 1991, CONSTANTINESCO, 1991), que le principe de subsidiarité, règle de droit positif européen (traité de Maastricht - 1993) défini à l’article 3B (5TUE), aurait initialement été théorisé par la Doctrine sociale de l’Eglise au 20e siècle (Pie XI, Quadragesimo Anno, 1931). La règle « directive » (CORNU, Vocabulaire juridique, 2015) aurait toutefois été délestée de sa charge philosophique et théologique problématique pour s’apparenter à une règle de procédure. Sur le plan linguistique, la forme française subsidiarité serait un emprunt francisé du néologisme allemand Subsidiarität.Nombreux auteurs soulignent le caractère ambigu, polysémique ou gigogne d’une notion « plus politique que juridique » (DU GRANRUT, 1997, BARROCHE, 2012). Cet « élément juridique communautaire » (Rapport parlementaire DE LA MALENE, 1996-1997), introduit par J. Delors et A. Spinelli dans les années 1980, aurait eu pour vocation de désamorcer les conflits relatifs à la caractérisation constitutionnelle de l’Union Européenne. Il permettrait également d’organiser de manière souple la réalisation des objectifs politiques communautaires définis par les Traités européens dans le domaine des « compétences partagées » (TUE). La thèse s’attache à montrer les incohérences des hypothèses linguistiques relatives au rattachement de cette notion et de sa forme linguistique (subsidiarité, substantivation de subsidiaire (secours, renfort d’un élément inférieur à une chose supérieure, initialement en contexte militaire latin)), ainsi qu’à son rattachement à des sources philosophiques et théologiques en particuliers thomistes et personnalistes.Une recherche sur l’étymon latin et de l’occurrence allemande (Subsidiarität), tend à montrer que la forme subsidiarité désigne initialement le droit romain (subsidiäres Recht), occurrence régulière de la doctrine juridique allemande, tout au long du 19e siècle. La thèse présente donc les résultats d’un repérage et de la collecte d’un corpus d’occurrences de subsidäre(r) Recht/Staat, Subsidiarität, Subsidiarität der Staat, Subsidiär-Prinzip, Subsidiaritätsprinzip, Grundsatz der Subsidiarität, Prinzip der Subsidiarität, dans les œuvres de la science allemande du droit, en particulier chez les membres de l’Ecole historique du droit (F. K. VON SAVIGNY) et chez les premiers formalistes (Paul LABAND, Georg JELLINEK) et penseurs allemands de l’Etat de droit (Robert VON MOHL, Julius VON STAHL). Le travail discute cette occurrence comme une formule discursive, c'est-à-dire un mot d’ordre politique allemand, qui se diffuse dans la science juridique et dans les œuvres de l’école historique d’économie, tout au long du 19e siècle. Initialement, il est un mot d’ordre historiciste, avancé par Savigny dans la Querelle de la codification qui traverse les Etats allemands de l’Ancien Empire Romain Germanique, à partir du Congrès de Vienne (1814). L’occurrence (adjectivale et adverbiale) se diffuse par la suite et devient un motif de l’Etat de droit social (en particulier à partir de R. VON MOHL, 1829), se substantive, devient un principe juridique (relations les ordres juridiques régionaux et fédéraux), puis pénètre la terminologie économique (Etat subsidiaire, devoir subsidiaire de l’Etat dans l’assistance aux pauvres). Son motif conditionne le vote des premières lois dites « sociales » sous Otto von Bismarck. / The PhD is the result of a research carried out in the sciences of language: lexicology, lexical semantics and discourse analysis. It is based on the primary sources of European Union law, the doctrinal sources of the Church's Social Doctrine and the corpus of German legal doctrinal texts, as well as a rereading of philosophical sources: Aristotelianism, Thomism, Kantism and romanticism.It is generally argued by European legal doctrine (in France, MILLON-DELSOL, 1991, CONSTANTINESCO, 1991) that the principle of subsidiarity, a rule of positive European law (Maastricht Treaty - 1993) defined in Article 3B), would initially have been theorized by the Social Doctrine of the Church in the 20th century (Pius XI, Quadragesimo Anno, 1931). The "directive" rule (CORNU, Legal Vocabulary, 2015), however, would have been relieved of its problematic philosophical and theological position in order to resemble a procedural rule. On the linguistic level, the French form subsidiarity would be a francized loan of the German neologism Subsidiarität.The PhD focuses on the inconsistencies of the linguistic hypotheses related to the connection of this notion and its linguistic form (subsidiarity, substantivation of the adjective subsidiary (relief, reinforcement of an element lower than a superior thing, initially in a Latin military context), as well as its attachment to philosophical and theological sources, in particular Thomists and personalists.A search for the Latin etymon and the German occurrence (Subsidiarität) tends to show that the subsidiarity form originally designates the Roman law (subsidiäres Recht), a regular occurrence of German legal doctrine throughout the 19th century. The PhD therefore presents the results of a retrieval and collection of a corpus of occurrences of subsidäre (Recht/Staat, Subsidiarität, Subsidiarität der Staat, Subsidiär-Prinzip, Subsidiaritätsprinzip, Grundsatz der Subsidiarität, Prinzip der Subsidiarität) in the works of the German legal science, especially among the members of the Historical School of Law (FK VON SAVIGNY) and the first formalists (Paul LABAND, Georg JELLINEK) and German thinkers of the Rule of Law VON MOHL, Julius VON STAHL).The work discusses this occurrence as a discursive formula, that is to say a German political slogan, which is diffused in the legal science and in the works of the historical school of economics, throughout the 19th century. Initially, it is a historicist slogan, advanced by Savigny in the Quarrel of the codification which crosses the German states of the Old Germanic Roman Empire, starting from the Congress of Vienna (1814). The occurrence (adjectival and adverbial) is subsequently disseminated and becomes a motive of the social law state (especially from R. VON MOHL, 1829), becomes substantive, becomes a legal principle (relations legal orders Regional and federal), then penetrates the economic terminology (Subsidiary State, subsidiary duty of the State in assisting the poor). His motive conditioned the vote of the first laws called "social" under Otto von Bismarck.The PhD attempts to demonstrate that the pontifical occurrence of 1931 is a late borrowing from these different theoretical and doctrinal sources and not a Catholic neologism.