صندلی اداری طراحی قالب وردپرس آموزش وردپرس

The discourse of bioethics in the ECtHR case-law


Abstract


This corpus-based study investigates linguistic practices and strategies of dealing with issues of bioethics in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”). The study aims at researching the linguistic strategies of knowledge production and entextualisation in 92 judgments of the ECtHR, focusing on the interaction between legal and bioethical term-related phraseological units – i.e. multi-word terms and term-embedding collocations with a verb – their structure and distributional patterns. Recurrent phraseological units are identified and analysed using methods of corpus linguistics and the theoretical framework of specialised phraseology. The study pursues general descriptive goals and aims at researching the balance and intersection between bioethically charged phraseology and legal phraseology. The main focus is placed on the analysis of typicality of patterning, expressed in terms of domain specificity, association score and log-likelihood.

DOI Code: 10.1285/i22390359v29p269

Keywords: bioethics; ECtHR judgments; specialised phraseology; multi-word terms; term-embedding collocations

References


Alcaraz Varò E. and Hughes B. 2002, Legal Translation Explained, St. Jerome Publishing, Manchester.

Anthony L. 2014, AntConc (Version 3.4.4) [Computer Software], Waseda University, Tokyo. http://www.laurenceanthony.net/.

Bergenholtz H. and Tarp S. 1995, Manual of Specialised Lexicography: The Preparation of Specialised Dictionaries, Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia.

Bhatia V. 2006, Legal Genres, in Brown K. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Languages and Linguistics, Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 1-7.

Bhatia V. 2014 [2004], Worlds of Written Discourse: A Genre-Based View, Continuum, London.

Biel Ł. 2014a, Lost in the Eurofog. The Textual Fit of Translated Law, Peter Lang, Frankfurt am Main.

Biel Ł. 2014b, Phraseology in Legal Translation: a Corpus-based Analysis of Textual Mapping in EU Law, in Cheng L., Kui Sin K. and Wagner A. (eds), Ashgate Handbook of Legal Translation, Ashgate, Aldershot, pp. 177-192.

Bioethics and the Case-law of the Court 2016 [2009], Research Report, Council of Europe / European Court of Human Rights. http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Research_report_bioethics_ENG.pdf (27.06.2017).

Calsamiglia H. and van Dijk T. 2004, Popularization Discourse and Knowledge about Genome, in “Discourse and Society” 15 [4], pp. 369-389.

Chromà M. 2011, Synonymy and Polysemy in Legal Terminology and Their Applications to Bilingual and Bijural Translation, in Legal Terminology: Approaches and Applications, a special issue of “Research in Language” 9 [1], pp. 31-50.

Claridge C. 2000, Multi-word Verbs in Early Modern English: A Corpus-Based Study, Language and Computers 32, Rodopi Publishers, Amsterdam.

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, European Treaty Series - No. 164, Oviedo, 4.IV.1997. https://rm.coe.int/168007cf98 (27.06.2017).

Crystal D. and Davy D. 1973, The Language of Legal Documents, in Crystal D. and Davy D. (eds.), Investigating English Style, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp. 193-217.

Drouin P. 2003, Term Extraction Using Non-Technical Corpora as a Point of Leverage, in “Terminology” 9 [1], pp. 99-117.

Drouin P. 2012, TermoStat Web 3.0 [software], Université de Montréal. http://termostat.ling.umontreal.ca/doc_termostat/doc_termostat_en.html

ECtHR Rules of Court as of 14 November 2016. https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Rules_Court_ENG.pdf (26.02.2018).

Garzone G. 2014, News Production and Scientific Knowledge: Exploring Popularization as a Process, in Bongo G. and Caliendo G. (eds.), The Language of Popularization: Die Sprache der Popularisierung, Peter Lang, Bern, pp. 73-107.

Granger S. and Paquot M. 2008, Disentangling the Phraseological Web, in Granger S. and Meunier F. (eds.), Phraseology: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 27-49.

Heid U. 2001, Collocations in Sublanguage Texts: Extraction from Corpora, in Wright S.E. and Budin G. (eds.), Handbook of Terminology Management. Application-Oriented Terminology Management, vol. 2, Benjamins, Amsterdam-Philadelphia, pp. 788-808.

Hudson J. 1998, Perspectives on Fixedness: Applied and Theoretical, Lund University Press, Lund.

Hyland K. 2008, As Can Be Seen: Lexical Bundles and Disciplinary Variation, in “English for Specific Purposes” 27, pp. 4-21.

Kjær A.L. 1990, Context-Conditioned Word Combinations in Legal Language, in “Terminology Science & Research, Journal of the International Institute of Terminology Research – IITF” 1 [1-2], pp. 21-32.

Kjær A.L. 2007, Phrasemes in Legal Texts, in Burger H., Dobrovol’skij D., Kühn P. and Norrick N. (eds.), Phraseology: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 506-516.

Lafon P. 1980, Sur la variabilité de la fréquence des formes dans un corpus, in “MOTS” 1, pp. 128-165.

Leech G., Hundt M., Mair Ch. and Smith N. 2009, Change in Contemporary English: A Grammatical Study, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Mellinkoff D. 1963, The Language of the Law, Little Brown & Co, Boston.

Meyer I. and Mackintosh K. 1994, Phraseme Analysis and Concept Analysis: Exploring a Symbiotic Relationship in the Specialized Lexicon, in Martin W. (ed.), Euralex 94 Proceedings, Amsterdam, pp. 339-348.

Myers G. 2003, Discourse Studies of Scientific Popularization: Questioning the Boundaries, in “Discourse Studies” 5 [2], pp. 265-279.

Nikitina J. 2018, Legal Style Markers and Their Translation: Written Pleadings at the ECtHR, Edizioni accademiche italiane / OmniScriptum Publishing, Beau Bassin-Riga.

Riley A. 1995, The Meaning of Words in English Legal Texts: Mastering the Vocabulary of the Law – A Legal Task, in “Law Teacher” 29-30, pp. 68-83.

Quirk R., Greenbaum S., Leech G. and Svartvik J. 1985, A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, Longman, London.

Sager J. 1998, Terminology: Theory, in Baker M. (ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, Routledge, London-New York, pp. 258-262.

Scarpa F., Peruzzo K. and Pontrandolfo G. 2014, Methodological, Terminological and Phraseological Challenges in the Translation into English of the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure, in Gialuz M., Lupária L. and Scarpa F. (eds.), The Italian Code of Criminal Procedure. Critical Essays and English Translation, Wolters Kluwer / CEDAM, Padova, pp. 53-80.

Scott M. 2015, Wordsmith Tools version 6 [computer software], Lexical Analysis Software, Stroud.

Sinclair J. 2004, Trust the Text: Language, Corpus and Discourse, Routledge, London/New York.

Teubert W. 2002, The Role of Parallel Corpora in Translation and Multilingual Lexicography, in Altenberg B. and Granger S. (eds.), Lexis in Contrast, Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 189-214.

Tiersma P. 1999, Legal English, Chicago University Press, Chicago/London.

Tiersma P. 2015 [2006], Some Myths about Legal Language, in Solan L., Ainsworth J. and Shuy R. (eds.), Speaking of Language and Law. Conversations on the Work of Peter Tiersma, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 27-34.

Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, adopted by UNESCO's General Conference on 19 October 2005. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001461/146180E.pdf, (27.06.2017).

van Dijk T.A. 2003, The Discourse-Knowledge Interface, in Wodak R. and Weiss G. (eds.), Critical Discourse Analysis. Theory and Interdisciplinarity, Palgrave, London, pp. 85-109.

Widdowson H. 1979, Explorations in applied linguistics, Oxford University Press, Oxford.


Full Text: pdf

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 3.0 Italia License.