| Abstract |
De Groot and Rayar (1995), after a review of two bilingual legal dictionaries, express dissatisfaction with the current state of affair and suggest 10 desiderata for bilingual legal dictionaries. Their major complaint is that many bilingual legal dictionaries are only glossaries to which suggestions for their translation have been provided These 'translational equivalents' are then often employed without reference to the appropriate context of use. The present paper agrees with theirjudgment, but seeks to review critically the 10 desiderata suggested in the context of Hong Kong. With its return to China in 1997, Hong Kong is allowed to keep its common law system, inherited from its former colonial master Great Britain. China, however, uses the civil law system and Chinese is not a legal language in the common law system. These pose serious problem to legal bilingualism. A bilingual legal dictionary can be a useful educational tool, and has to be a bilingual dictionary and a law dictionary combined. Rather man giving translational equivalents, it must demystify the authority a bilingual dictionary often bestows on its translations and provide explanation and illustration of the uses of the translations in various legal contexts. |
| BibTex |
@InProceedings{ELX04-055,
author = {Matthew Wing-Kwong Leung},
title = {Designing an English-Chinese Bilingual Legal Dictionary },
pages = {495-500},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 11th EURALEX International Congress},
year = {2004},
month = {july},
date = {6-10},
address = {Lorient, France},
editor = {Geoffrey Williams and Sandra Vessier},
publisher = {UniversiteĢ de Bretagne-Sud, FaculteĢ des lettres et des sciences humaines},
isbn = {29-52245-70-3},
} |
