КОНЦЕПТУАЛЬНАЯ МЕТАФОРА В ХОРВАТСКОМ И РУССКОМ ЮРИДИЧЕСКОМ ДИСКУРСЕ1
ONCEPTUAL METAPHOR IN CROATIAN AND RUSSIAN LEGAL DISCOURSE

Summary/Abstract: The conceptual metaphor is one of the most important cognitive mechanisms, based on establishing connections between concepts belonging to different areas of knowledge (domains). A metaphor is defined as "understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another" (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980: 5; 2008), and metaphors have the capacity to profoundly shape our thinking. The traditional linguistic understanding of metaphor defines it as a word, rhetorical figure, or expression used in a figurative sense, which is based on the comparison of one object or phenomenon with another based on a shared characteristic. The unique feature of metaphor lies in its multifunctionality and polysemy. One of its functions (alongside nominative, pragmatic, and communicative) is the cognitive function, which views metaphor as a tool for knowledge acquisition and involves gaining new insights about the surrounding world (McCormack, 1990). In George Lakoff’s interpretation, and that of other researchers, conceptual metaphor is considered a universal feature of human thought. It is not limited solely to the realm of language and can be expressed both verbally and non-verbally, such as through gestures, music, or visual arts. Conceptual metaphor theory views it as a process occurring at the level of human cognition, which is then reflected in linguistic structures. The semantics of a metaphor is influenced by context and situation, i.e., “in speech, specific conditions of nomination are considered, and selection occurs based on the communication situation. Figurative designation is semantized according to specific rules” (Dubrovina & Sakovets, 2020: 86; citing Nikitin, 1979: 99). Metaphors reflect a worldview, embodying specific national and cultural characteristics of how reality is conceptualized. While metaphors may differ across languages, “we act according to how we conceive of things” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980). Conceptual metaphors can belong to different cultures, and many are universal. Previous research demonstrates that metaphor is unavoidable in legal language and is often found in legal discourse (Morra, Rossi & Bazzanella, 2006; Palashevskaya, 2010; Husinec, 2011; Konstantinova, 2011; Cherdantsev, 2012; Bogacheva, 2021; Yaroshchuk, 2022, among others). Modern rhetoric of legal discourse increasingly incorporates metaphors, making legal texts more vivid and comprehensible to a broader audience. Legal discourse functions as a unique code used within institutional environments (courtrooms, prosecution offices, notaries, legal practices, parliaments, police, prisons). It encompasses normative texts, legal documents, academic and instructional legal texts, and court proceedings, including the speeches of participants such as judges, lawyers, prosecutors, and witnesses. Legal discourse is characterized by its coherence—its unity in content, lexicon, grammar, and logic. Its components form a hierarchically structured system aimed at legal regulation and the realization of law. Legal discourse is employed by prosecutors, judges, lawyers, notaries, police officers, and others in various settings like courts, prisons, and legal offices. Characteristics of Legal Discourse: 1. It operates within the field of law. 2. It adheres to norms: the themes and motives of legal discourse center around the law, its content, compliance, and alignment with legal standards (e.g., evaluating actions, behaviors, or conduct). 3. It regulates social relationships, thereby exhibiting its communicative function. 4. It contains legal terms and concepts. Moreover, in legal proceedings involving participants from different countries and language backgrounds, translators and legal translations play a crucial role. Legal translation is not merely the conversion of text from one language to another but also the transfer of legal knowledge into another legal system (Mikulaco, 2020). The primary qualities of a good translation are adequacy and equivalence. Adequacy is achieved through knowledge of both the language and the legal system of the source text, as well as the target language. An adequate translation ensures effective communication between the source (author) and the recipient (the source text and the translated text). Equivalence refers to interlingual synonyms that do not depend on context, establishing a consistent synonymy between the translation and the source language. Semantic equivalence implies identical meaning between linguistic units of the source and target languages (Semenov, 2013: 208–210). A translator must adhere to the concept that is equivalent for the target language, considering both the context of the source and target texts while also accounting for intercultural pragmatics (Wierbicka, 2003). Objective of the Study The aim of this study is to identify which conceptual metaphors are used in Croatian and Russian legal documents (specifically, court decisions) and determine their linguistic implementation. The goal is to understand how legal translation can provide suitable solutions and create accurate, precise, and meaningful interpretations, which can be directly applied for pedagogical purposes. Such translations enhance the understanding of legal discourse, enrich vocabulary, and thereby improve proficiency in specialized legal language, broadening professional lexicon (especially within legal terminology). Consequently, this helps students recognize the presence of metaphors in legal discourse and master the types of conceptual metaphors along with their similar or different implementations in Croatian and Russian legal languages. A cognitive approach to language supports linguistic research, focusing on studying terminology and phraseology, particularly in law. Legal terminology is characterized by its precision and clarity in structuring knowledge. Legal language is designed to ensure unambiguity in understanding legal rules and concepts (Bogacheva, 2021). Over centuries, legal language and terminology have evolved alongside changes in society and human relationships. However, human behavior remains constant, and legal regulation has consistently aimed to limit and guide it. Legal language serves as a repository of historical memory and human thought. Since human cognition is metaphorical, and cognitive systems result from life experiences and the culture in which we grow, law mirrors the essence of human cognition. The application of conceptual metaphors within the comparative analysis of Croatian and Russian legal discourse has not been thoroughly examined before. This study addresses this gap, exploring the role and functioning of conceptual metaphors in legal discourse, thereby establishing the relevance of the topic. The research investigates the conceptual metaphors present in Croatian and Russian legal documents, specifically court decisions. It examines the similarities and differences in metaphorical usage between the two languages, the linguistic realizations of these metaphors in legal discourse and the implications of these findings for legal translation and pedagogy. Since both languages are Slavic and their legal systems share common roots in continental European law, the study hypothesizes significant overlap in metaphorical conceptualization while also anticipating linguistic nuances and cultural variations. Theoretical Background and Methodology The Role of Metaphor in Legal Discourse Legal language, though often perceived as rigid and technical, relies heavily on metaphor to articulate abstract principles, describe legal processes, and frame complex arguments. For example, the courtroom is often conceptualized as a battlefield, with opposing sides engaging in strategic "combat" to emerge victorious. This metaphorical framing shapes how legal professionals and laypersons understand the adversarial nature of the justice system. Metaphors also serve pedagogical purposes, aiding students, translators, and practitioners in grasping intricate legal concepts. By framing abstract legal notions in relatable terms, metaphors facilitate comprehension and foster a deeper understanding of legal principles. Methodology The study employs a comparative analysis of two corpora:  Croatian Corpus: 30 court decisions from the Supreme Court of Croatia, totaling 24,720 words.  Russian Corpus: 21 court decisions from the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, totaling 25,095 words. Texts were selected using keyword searches to identify metaphorical expressions. The analysis focused on identifying, categorizing, and comparing conceptual metaphors, with an emphasis on linguistic realizations and implications for translation. Findings: Legal Proceedings as a Battlefield A dominant metaphor in both Croatian and Russian legal discourse is “legal proceedings as a battlefield.” This metaphor reflects the adversarial nature of legal systems, where opposing parties "fight" for a favorable outcome. The courtroom, in this context, is metaphorically depicted as a site of conflict, with legal practitioners engaging in strategic battles. Key Components of the Metaphor 1) Battle Terminology o Croatian legal discourse frequently employs terms rooted in military or conflict contexts. For example, branitelj (defender) derives from military terminology and is used to describe the legal defender of a client. Similarly, napad (attack) is used figuratively to describe prosecutorial strategies or allegations. o Russian legal discourse mirrors this with terms like защитник (defender) and нападение (attack), reinforcing the combative framing of courtroom dynamics. 2) Strategic Actions a. In Croatian, actions like filing a lawsuit are described using dynamic verbs such as ustati (to rise) and podignuti (to lift), evoking imagery of physical preparation for battle. For example, ustati s tužbom (to rise with a lawsuit) suggests readiness to engage in legal conflict. b. Russian uses verbs like предъявить (to present) and подать (to file), which convey similar tactical movements in the legal arena. 3) Victory and Defeat a. Both languages employ metaphorical language to describe the outcomes of legal battles. Croatian expressions such as pobijediti u sporu (to win a dispute) and izgubiti parnicu (to lose a case) align with Russian equivalents выиграть дело (to win a case) and проиграть дело (to lose a case). b. The victorious party is metaphorically portrayed as a “winner,” while the losing party assumes the role of the “defeated.” 4) Roles of Participants a. Croatian legal terminology includes feminized forms, such as tužiteljica (female plaintiff), reflecting genderspecific linguistic practices. Russian, in contrast, rarely uses such forms in legal discourse, highlighting a cultural and linguistic divergence. Linguistic Nuances and Challenges Despite the shared conceptual metaphor, linguistic differences emerge between Croatian and Russian:  Verb Usage: Croatian verbs like ustati and podignuti have no direct equivalents in Russian, where actions are described using предъявить and подать. This divergence underscores differing metaphorical framings of legal actions.  Gendered Language: Croatian extensively uses feminized nouns (braniteljica for female defender), whereas Russian predominantly employs gender-neutral terms, reflecting cultural differences in professional language.  Semantic Variability: Croatian’s izgubiti (to lose) has broader applications than its Russian counterparts, which use distinct verbs like терять (to lose something abstract) and проиграть (to lose a case). Broader Applications of Metaphors While “legal proceedings as a battlefield” dominates, other metaphors enrich Croatian and Russian legal discourse:  Law as a Journey: o Croatian phrases like tijek rasprave (course of the trial) and Russian ход судебного разбирательства (course of legal proceedings) frame legal processes as journeys with defined paths and destinations.  Law as Weighing Scales: o Croatian’s težina dokaza (weight of evidence) and Russian вес доказательств reflect the evaluative nature of judicial decision-making.  Law as Personification: o Croatian’s povreda zakona (violation of the law) personifies legal statutes, attributing them with human-like qualities of being harmed or violated. Pedagogical Implications Metaphors pose challenges for legal translation, requiring cultural and linguistic sensitivity. Misinterpreting metaphorical expressions can lead to inaccuracies and misunderstandings. Educational Strategies 1. Contextual Training: Legal translators and students must develop an awareness of metaphorical language and its implications. For example, understanding the nuances of ustati s tužbom in Croatian and its Russian equivalent ensures accurate translation. 2. Practical Exercises: Exercises comparing metaphorical expressions, such as Croatian podignuti optužnicu (to raise an indictment) and Russian предъявить обвинение (to present an accusation), enhance students’ linguistic and analytical skills. 3. Expanding Vocabulary: Teaching metaphors as part of legal terminology enriches students’ understanding of legal discourse and improves their ability to articulate complex ideas. Conclusions and Future Directions The analysis of Croatian and Russian examples of the conceptual metaphor “legal proceedings as a battlefield” in court decisions and judgments revealed that both Croatian and Russian legal discourse employs the same type of conceptual metaphor, with identical or similar linguistic realizations, as well as differing linguistic expressions. In Russian, various verbs are used to express the same concept (e.g., the Croatian verb izgubiti has a broad range of meanings, whereas in Russian, distinct verbs such as предъявить (to present) and подать (to file) are used). Another difference lies in the Croatian language’s use of feminine forms (feminatives) to denote participants in legal proceedings (e.g., masculine branitelj and feminine braniteljica). The substantial similarity in metaphor usage can be attributed to the fact that both Croatian and Russian are related Slavic languages within the IndoEuropean language family. Additionally, both belong to the Romano-Germanic legal tradition (continental European law) and the Western cultural sphere. The presence of conceptual metaphors in Croatian legal texts undoubtedly requires further confirmation through systematic studies of larger corpora. These studies should also extend to other conceptual metaphors, such as those framing legal proceedings as a medical examination (pravni lijek – legal remedy, uzrok – cause), as a journey (tijek rasprave – course of the trial, započinje parnica – the trial begins), as weighing (opteretio – burdened, težina dokaza – weight of evidence), or as personification (e.g., the frequent use in Croatian of povreda zakona, prava – violation of the law or rights). Future research would benefit from conducting a more detailed contrastive analysis of the linguistic features of legal discourse or legal genres (e.g., normative acts, contracts, academic articles, legal periodicals) to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of the degree of overlap. Future Research 1. Expanding the corpus to include other legal genres, such as contracts and legislation. 2. Exploring additional metaphors, such as “law as medicine” or “law as architecture.” 3. Investigating the pedagogical impact of metaphor-focused language instruction. By examining conceptual metaphors in legal discourse, this research contributes to the broader understanding of how language shapes legal thought and practice, fostering better cross-linguistic communication and education.

• Details
• Contents