Translating Worlds of Law: A Theoretical and Practical Inquiry
Translating Worlds of Law: A Theoretical and Practical Inquiry

Summary/Abstract: If we were to use a substitute for the verb ‘to translate’ in order to avoid repetition, we would be faced with the challenge of choosing appropriately from an array of different words such as ‘to transfer’, ‘to transform’, ‘to transcribe’, ‘to transplant’ or ‘to interpret’. Nonetheless, the issue at hand might not even consist of singling out a suitable replacement, but rather of finding a word that entails all meanings and nuances of sense hidden in the hypernym ‘to translate’. What then does the expression ‘to translate law’ actually signify? Can we remain faithful both to language and to law? And to what degree can we rely on words to convey the complex world of law? The present article endeavours to answer these questions by dwelling on some issues related to the translation of law in the European Union. Thus, particular emphasis is placed on ‘contested’ or ambiguous concepts, i.e. concepts that lend themselves to different meanings and interpretations according to the legal system that either creates or borrows them.

• Details
• Contents