Ondřej Klabal*

Tricky Terms in Legal Translation from and to English: Stepping up to

the Classroom Challenge

Abstract
Legal translation competence includes a high number of sub-competences that legal translation trainees need to master.
Therefore, trainers may have no time to tackle issues at the very micro level that are challenging not only for legal translation
trainees, but sometimes even for professional translators. Although many such issues are identified in legal translation
textbooks, the prevailing holistic approach to teaching legal translation may have led to such issues being sidelined in the
legal translation classroom. Drawing on the author’s experience as a legal translation trainer, this paper attempts to fill this
vacuum and offer a systematic approach to addressing at least some of these phenomena. A selection of tricky terms will
be presented, together with practical activities designed to raise trainees’ awareness of such issues and teach them how to
approach them confidently when translating from and to English. Four groups of terms are covered: false friends in general
and legal language; vague terms such as good and reasonable; non-transparent terms where complex legal meaning is
packed into a simple term (constructive, in lieu of), and enantiosemous terms (apparent, qualified). It is believed that when
such phenomena are tackled in isolation, trainees may become better equipped to deal with them successfully the next time
they encounter them in an English source text or to use them actively when translating into English.

Keywords
legal language; tricky legal terms; legal translation training; vagueness; enantiosemy; false friends; non-transparent terms

1. Introduction
Legal translation is generally considered a tricky field with numerous pitfalls, as highlighted by
Newmark (1993, p. 16). Such pitfalls will be referred to as tricky terms, which is an umbrella term
used in this paper to include synonyms, polysemous words, false friends, non-transparent words,
vague words, or enantiosemous words. Since legal translation competence as defined by a number
of models (e.g. Prieto Ramos 2011; Scarpa & Orlando 2017; Piecychna 2013) is highly complex and
comprehensive, trainers often lack time to deal with issues at the very micro level such as those
discussed in this paper, even though such issues may be challenging not only for legal translation
trainees, but also for seasoned professional translators. While such issues are often identified as a
challenge in legal language and legal translation (see Alcaráz Varó & Hughes 2012; Bázlik &
Böhmerová 2019), they are often left behind in the translation classroom because of the prevailing
holistic approaches to legal translation training, which put the macro level in the forefront. However,
it is believed that such tricky terms need to receive special attention in a legal translation classroom
since trainees, and possibly even novice legal translation trainers, may often fail to realise their
complexity and the challenges involved. Once trainees become aware of such pitfalls, it will be easier
for them to deal with such tricky terms effectively and systematically in their future careers.
Against this background, this paper attempts to address such tricky terms not from a legal or
linguistic perspective, but primarily as a teaching challenge, and presents ways to introduce students
to such terms as well as exercises to practise their competent use. Some of the categories of tricky
terms have been addressed from the classroom perspective elsewhere (see e.g. Klabal 2022), and
some are rather complex and would merit a separate paper (e.g. polysemous words). Therefore, this

* Ondřej Klabal
Department of English and American Studies, Faculty of Arts
Palacký University Olomouc
[email protected]

Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 64 – 2024, 125-136

126

paper takes the classroom perspective on four categories of tricky terms, namely false friends, non-
transparent words, vague words, and enantiosemous terms. It is hoped that the paper will also
partially fill the gap in teaching materials, since those available are rarely focused on translators or
translation trainees and often lack a comparative perspective.

2. Teaching considerations
The exercises presented in this paper are anchored in the constructivist approaches to translator
training (see Kiraly 2010), which emphasise the authenticity of the material used and the
collaboration of the learners. Where appropriate, the exercises are conceived of as pair work or group
work exercises, with the teacher only serving as a facilitator responsible for providing scaffolding
(Kiraly 2010, p. 45).
In terms of sequencing, it is possible to apply the steps proposed by González-Davies (2004, p.
37), starting with awareness-raising activities, moving through exposure to possible translation
problems, decision making, and justification of choices, and eventually resulting in a final product.
Since the issues tackled in this paper do not qualify as translation proper, some of the steps are not
relevant, and thus the emphasis is put on awareness raising and justification of choices. The exercises
could be used as a stepping stone to develop activities around the same issue for the remaining steps.
The exercise types are not innovative and are based on the author’s experience as well as exercises
proposed by González-Davies (2004). Since authenticity is important in constructivist translator
training, the exercises are mostly based on real-life legal documents from the author’s translation
practice, which have been duly anonymised, or from relevant legal sources available online, such as
legislation, the websites of law firms, contracts, and other legal documents1.

3. False friends
False friends are defined by Crystal (1987, p. 347) as “words that look the same in two languages
[but] often do not mean the same thing”. Logically, there are different pairs of false friends for
different language pairs, which makes the exercises in this section less generalisable.2 In addition,
some false friends may be only partial false friends “that may actually be cognates when used in one
branch of law, while perhaps qualifying as false friends in another legal practice area” (Jowers 2021).
In other cases, there may also be jurisdiction-specific false friends. What applies quite universally,
though, is the fact that there are two categories of false friends that need to be addressed in the
classroom: general language false friends that (frequently) appear in legal texts, and special legal
language false friends. The former may be addressed by presenting students with authentic sentences
that include the false friends and asking them to contrast the meanings and translate them into the
respective language, as shown for the Czech-English pair in Table 1.

1 Since single sentences have been extracted for the sake of variety, it is believed that specifying the source of every
single sentence is not necessary. Care has been taken to use sources which may be presumed to have been drafted by
native speakers.
2 See Bázlik & Böhmerová (2019) for a comprehensive list for the Czech-English pair, or Jowers (2021) for the Spanish-

English pair.

Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 64 – 2024, 125-136

 127

CZECH ENGLISH
Aktuální hodnota akcií společnosti je oproti minulému roku Depending on the company’s performance, the actual value
nižší. of shares may appreciate or depreciate.
Kupující má právo na výměnu zboží za nové stejného typu A patent owner must receive adequate damages from the
nebo za adekvátní náhradu jím odsouhlasenou. infringer to compensate for the infringement.
Komplexní strategické plánování je tvořeno na úrovni Liability for environmental damage is a complex legal issue
vrcholového řízení firmy. that can indeed provide enough intellectual ʻfoodʼ to keep
any group of legal experts.

Table 1. General language false friends

The category of legal false friends may be addressed in a number of different ways. The proposed
exercise 1 aims to make students identify frequently misused terms in Czech-English translation.
Exercise 1: Identifying false friends

TASK: Identify the incorrectly used false friends (Czech-English pair):

• The autopsy protocol failed to specify the exact cause of death. (report)
• Judicature of the Constitutional Court may be as binding as a law. (case law)
• The Tenant shall pay a caution equalling two monthly rents. (security deposit)
• Each country keeps evidence of its citizens. (register)
• The existing law will be derogated once a new one is passed. (repealed, abrogated)
• Only statutory bodies are authorised to bind legal entities. (governing bodies).
• All the companies in the concern are subject to special reporting obligations.
(group).

For the purposes of this paper, the false friends to be identified are underlined in the exercise, and
the “correct” terms are provided in brackets, both of which would be absent in a version presented to
students. The list of examples could be much longer, but the essence of the exercise should be clear.
Even though the exercise is based on the Czech-English pair, some of the false friends may be
relevant for other language pairs (e.g. Konzern in Germany, caución in Spanish), and the exercise
may thus be easily adaptable.

4. Vague terms
As argued by many (e.g. Tiersma 1999; Endicott 2011), vagueness is an inherent feature of legal
language and has been widely addressed from both the legal and semantic perspectives.3 It is usually
defined as “uncertain breadth of meaning” (Black 2009, p. 1689). Tiersma summarises the reasons
for using vague language as follows: (i) it allows a legislature to use a general term without having
to specify in advance what it includes, (ii) it permits the law to adapt to differing circumstances, and
(iii) it enables the law to deal with novel situations that are certain to occur in the future, as well as
changing norms and standards. With reference to contract language, Wiggers (2011, p. 20), on the
one hand, suggests avoiding vague terms in contract drafting, but, on the other hand, admits that
vague words may serve a useful purpose since clear obligations are not always agreeable and vague
wording may allow for some gentleman’s agreement, or many obligations cannot be defined in an
all-embracing manner, and precise criteria may be dependent on extraneous uncertainties.
Sometimes, it is even expressly admitted that vague words are used “because of, and in spite of their
flexibility” (Triebel 2009, p. 155) Given the usefulness of vague language, it is unsurprisingly
common in legal texts, and thus legal translators will encounter it in the source texts they are asked

3 See Endicott (2011) for a comprehensive overview. Often, vagueness is discussed together with ambiguity under the
label of indeterminacy (see Anesa 2014; Chromá 2005).

Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 64 – 2024, 125-136

128

to translate and thus need to be introduced to the intricacies thereof. In addition, there is also a
comparative element present, as Wiggers (2011, p. 21) observes that lawyers from civil law
jurisdictions may feel more comfortable with vagueness than those from common law jurisdictions.
An extract from the Irish Non-fatal Offences against the Person Act may be shown to trainees as
an example of a legislative provision including a number of vague expressions:
No such offence is committed if the force or impact, not being intended or likely to cause
injury, is in the circumstances such as is generally acceptable in the ordinary conduct of daily
life and the defendant does not know or believe that it is in fact unacceptable to the other
person.
The italicised expressions are all instances of vague language. The adjective likely is related to the
standard of what a reasonable person would expect; the degree of acceptability is intended to be made
more objective by the modifiers generally and in fact.
To explain the phenomenon of vagueness to legal translation trainees, it is useful to introduce a
distinction between transparently vague terms and extravagantly vague terms (cf. Endicott 2005;
Marmor 2014) since each of these categories requires a different translation strategy. Transparently
vague words make it possible to define a single cut-off point which would clearly establish the
borderline (even though arbitrary). For example, if a tax is imposed on rich people, rich is a vague
term, but an arbitrary threshold will be defined by the applicable income tax legislation, e.g. by
reference to a multiple of the average salary. However, the fact that such a point may be (rather)
arbitrarily defined by the law does not mean that there is agreement as to the borderline cases in two
respects: first, as to the resolution of borderline cases, and second, as to which cases constitute
borderline cases (cf. Endicott 2011, pp. 176-177). When facing such vague terms in source texts,
translation trainees should be instructed, if possible, to look up the rules defining the cut-off point
and specify the cut-off point in the translation.
For example, Section 138 of the Czech Criminal Code defines categories of damage which are
relevant for determining the severity of the crimes. Vague terms are used as labels for the categories
and then used in the descriptions of individual crimes. Chromá (2005) suggests more or less literal
translations for the categories of damage used in the translation below, which I find inconvenient for
two reasons. In addition to being vague, they are also culturally bound, depending on the economic
situation in the respective jurisdiction. In other words, while damage from CZK 50,001 to CZK
100,000 is not small under Czech legislation, small claims under UK legislation are defined as claims
up to GBP 10,000.4
Zákonné ustanovení § 138 trestního zákoníku České republiky určující charakter vzniklé
škody zní:
(1) Škodou nikoli nepatrnou (damage not insignificant) se rozumí škoda dosahující částky
nejméně 10 000 Kč, škodou nikoli malou (damage not small) se rozumí škoda dosahující
částky nejméně 50 000 Kč, větší škodou (larger damage) se rozumí škoda dosahující částky
nejméně 100 000 Kč, značnou škodou (substantial damage) se rozumí škoda dosahující
částky nejméně 1 000 000 Kč a škodou velkého rozsahu (extensive damage) se rozumí škoda
dosahující nejméně částky 10 000 000 Kč.
Therefore, it will be more useful for the recipient if the translator abandons the vague labels and
introduces a scaling system (Class 1, Class 2 damage, and/or specifies the actual extent). A proposed
translation may then read as follows:

4 Depending on the applicable exchange rate, this equals approximately CZK 300,000.

Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 64 – 2024, 125-136

 129

The limits for damage, benefit, costs of remedying environmental damage and property value
(1) For the purposes of the Criminal Code:
a) Class 1 damage means damage greater than or equal to CZK 10,000,
b) Class 2 damage means damage greater than or equal to CZK 50,000,
c) Class 3 damage means damage greater than or equal to CZK 100,000,
d) Class 4 damage means damage greater than or equal to CZK 1,000,000,
e) Class 5 damage means damage greater than or equal to CZK 10,000,000.
Then students may be presented with other examples that can be solved in a similar way.5
Extravagantly vague terms are words which are deliberately vague to leave room for (judicial)
interpretation and include words such as reasonable, fair, unnecessary, properly, or undue. This
category essentially corresponds to what Melinkoff (1963, p. 21) calls “weasel words”, defined as
“words and expressions with a very flexible meaning, strictly dependent on context and
interpretation”. Soames (2012, p. 103) argues against the term “extravagantly vague”, calling it a
misnomer, and claims that the exceptional utility of such expressions comes from the fact that apart
from being vague they are “highly general, multidimensional and resistant to specific codification”.
This category of vague terms is intended to be interpreted by courts and competent administrative
agencies. The first step is introducing trainees to the purposes for which such weasel words are used
(exercise 2). Once trainees are aware of their functions, they are asked to actively employ the words
in context in Exercise 3.
Exercise 2: Usage of weasel terms
TASK: Match the weasel words with their functions (based on Wiggers 2011):
Material To introduce an objective standard in a contract and place a limit on discretionary power or
overly strict obligations.
Reasonable To qualify phrases that would otherwise be too strict.
Substantially To allow for some minimum deviations after entering into an agreement.

5For example, the Czech classification of security regimes in prison relies on similarly vague terms (prison with
supervision, prison with enhanced supervision, secured prison) and thus may lend itself to a similar solution.

Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 64 – 2024, 125-136

130

Exercise 3: Weasel terms gap-fill

TASK: Complete the sentences with material, reasonable, or substantial or their adverbial
forms and think about the reason for using the term:
• This late fee sets forth __________ liquidated damages from the delay of Services
by the Service Partner, in which case ADVA’s losses and damages would be
difficult or impossible to ascertain.
• The Landlord confirms that it __________ completed or shall complete, at its
expense, the Landlord’s Works on or before the Commencement Date.
• The Company knows that an Integrator has breached a __________ provision of a
Sublicence.
• The Consultant does not complete or deliver the Services to a __________ standard
or in accordance with the Company’s reasonable requirements.
• There are no current actions, disputes, or claims which would result in a
__________ limitation of the use of any of the Real Properties.
• XY and/or YT shall also have the right, but not the obligation, to manufacture,
distribute, and sell, in any retail or other sales channel, products which are identical
or __________ similar to the Licensed Products.
• The merger affects the supply of goods and services in a _________ part of the
country.

To complicate the issue further, it is not sufficient to differentiate between the meanings of different
weasel words, but also between different meanings of a single weasel word, e.g. reasonable or good.
In addition to determining the meaning, it must also be established whether the word is a part of a
term of art. To make the decision-making process as straightforward as possible for the trainees, a
matrix featuring reasonable is used, based on Cuñado and Gomez (2023), as shown in Figure 1. To
put the decision-making process into practice, a series of exercises featuring different weasel words
follows (Exercises 4 and 6).

Figure 1. Matrix to determine the meaning of reasonable

Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 64 – 2024, 125-136

 131

Exercise 4. Determining translation strategies for reasonable

TASK: Work in pairs or groups and decide, using the matrix, how to deal with reasonable
in the following sentences:
• The Seller shall have forty-five (45) days from the date of notice to implement
actions reasonably requested by Purchaser.
• Each Manager has the right to examine the above documents for any purpose
reasonably related to their position as Manager of the Company.
• The Service Partner shall provide reasonable access to the relevant records and
facilities.
• If MS discovers unauthorised distribution by the Company or its Channel, it will
make commercially reasonable efforts to notify the Company.
• The Landlord does not guarantee that the Services will be free from interruption
caused by events or circumstances beyond the Landlord’s reasonable control.
• Any such non-structural repairs and maintenance made by the Tenant shall be at
least equal in quality and usefulness to the Premises, except for reasonable wear
and tear.

It is also important to realise that the terms may also appear in their negative forms, such as
unreasonable or immaterial, and as other parts of speech, i.e. not only adjectives. While the adjectival
forms often form part of terms of arts, the adverbial forms reasonably and unreasonably often form
part of specific collocations, such as as may be reasonably + adjective/past participle, or may not be
unreasonably + adjective/past participle. Since such collocational patterns may be useful and add to
legal idiomaticity when translating into English, an exercise to practise such collocations is proposed
(Exercise 5).
Exercise 5. Collocations with reasonably and unreasonably

TASK: Think about the best verb used as a past participle that may be used to complete the
gap:
• Each Party shall execute such documents and take such further steps as may be
reasonably _______ to carry out the provisions of this Agreement and the
transactions contemplated herein.
• The Supplier shall cooperate and provide such information and/or certifications
regarding its compliance with this sub-section (a) as may be reasonably ________
by the Customer.
• As a director you must carry out your duties with such skill and care as may be
reasonably _____ from a person in that position or from a person with specific
knowledge and experience.
• The authorisation may not be unreasonably _________.
• Generally, activities during non-working time, such as breaks or mealtimes, are
permissible and may not be unreasonably ________ by the employer.
• While disclosure of records may not be unreasonably ________, requestors should
understand that the ten days specified in the law is only a limit as to when a response
to a request must be given, not a deadline for producing the records.
• Where the consent of the other party is required, contracts often provide that consent
may not be unreasonably ____________.

Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 64 – 2024, 125-136

132

To make Exercise 5 easier, the words to be completed may be supplied (required, requested,
expected, refused, limited, delayed, withheld). Exercises similar to those suggested for reasonable
may also be designed for other weasel words, such as good as shown in Exercise 6.
6. Determining translation strategies for good

TASK: Work in pairs or groups and decide, using an analogue matrix, how to deal with
good in the following sentences:
• The contract may be extraordinarily terminated by either party at any time where good
grounds exist.
• This information derives from filings accepted in good faith without verification.
• Any packages not returned in good order and condition within a reasonable period
specified by XXX will be paid for by the Customer at XXX’S standard replacement
costs.
• It confirms that, as at that date, all filings were up to date and the Company was in
good standing.
• NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration the receipt and
sufficiency of which hereby are acknowledged by each of the parties, the parties hereto
agree as follows:
• In the letter the Defendant is trying to manipulate facts and circumstances against good
manners, settled terms, and the law.

The final step of these exercises should logically be a translation of the sentences into the target
language and discussion of the available vague words used in such a language. In doing so, the
comparative perspective must not be ignored.

5. Non-transparent terms
This section will introduce a couple of terms that may be described as non-transparent (see also
Böhmerová 2010). In my experience, many such terms are underused by legal translators, possibly
because of their perceived lack of transparency, despite the fact that they may express a complex idea
very concisely.
The first term to be tackled will be the term constructive. For Czech translators, the term is a
partial false friend and the meaning that is usually associated with the term is that found in
collocations such as constructive criticism or constructive meaning. Therefore, the meaning derived
from construction (of a contractual provision) often remains hidden to legal translators, even though
it is used quite productively in a number of legal terms, and conversely may be used quite
productively to express what Czech legal theory calls legal fiction. Legal fiction can be expressed
through verbs, where equivalent English phrases have been discussed (see Chromá 2014; Klabal
2020), or as a nominal term e.g. fikce doručení (literally translated as fiction of service/delivery),
which is a legal theory introducing a rule that an official notice/letter is taken as having been delivered
after some time even though we do not know whether the addressee actually got it. Even though the
literal translation is not used in English-speaking contexts, it is often used by translators, which shows
they do not know the equivalent English legal theory, which uses the adjective constructive to express
the meaning of fiction. The English theory is expressed as constructive notice, which is defined as a

6 See Triebel (2009) or Mellinkoff (1963) for lists of vague terms frequently used in contract and legal language
respectively.

Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 64 – 2024, 125-136

 133

legal fiction that someone actually received the notice regardless of whether or not they truly did
receive it. The adjective is used to mean that the notice is construed as having been delivered. In
class, the discussion of this example is followed by an exercise to practise the use of constructive in
other contexts. In addition to the reformulation, the meaning and legal use of each of the terms is also
discussed, as well as other grammatical structures used to express the meaning, such be construed as
or is constructively (dismissed/received/possessed).
Exercise 7. Constructive terms

TASK: Work in pairs to express the meaning of the following phrases using as if:
Constructive dismissal
Constructive approval
Constructive homicide
Constructive knowledge
Constructive abandonment
Constructive possession (of a firearm/drugs)

The second term to be presented is the phrase in lieu of, sometimes quoted as an example of French
in Legal English and often appearing on lists of words to be replaced with simple words, specifically
instead (Federal Plain Language Guidelines). The aim of Exercise 8 is to make students discover that
in addition to the meaning of replacement, the examples with lieu of also carry an additional meaning
of having the same legal effect, as shown in Table 2. The phrase is also often used as part of legal
terms of art. For example, payment in lieu of notice does not only mean that the employee will receive
a payment instead of working during the notice period, but also that the employer’s obligations to
the employee are settled by the payment as if the employee had kept working.
Exercise 8. Comparing in lieu of and instead
TASK: Work in groups or pairs and study the dictionary examples with in lieu of and instead, reflecting upon
whether in lieu of really carries only the meaning of instead.
• They gave us an IOU in lieu of cash. • I wish youʼd spend more time at home instead of
• Our old car is being given to our mechanic in lieu going out drinking with your friends every night.
of some money we owe him for repairs. • You can make shortbread with margarine instead
• He claimed that 85 per cent of Lords claimed the of butter, but it isnʼt the same.
maximum possible expenses in lieu of a salary. • You waste a lot of water by having a bath instead
• Her plea impressed the presiding judge, who of a shower.
offered to send her to Soviet Russia in lieu of jail
time, which Flynn turned down.
• You can take a lump sum in lieu of any unused
vacation entitlement.
• He was offered a cash bonus, or stock options in
lieu.

A has the same legal effect as B

payment IN LIEU OF notice
resolution meeting
settlement penalty
profit share salary
Table 2. Examples of terms with in lieu of

The introduction to the meaning of in lieu of is followed by a gap-filling exercise to learn and practise
more collocations. Exercise 9 also makes trainees think about the order of the nouns, i.e. what it
makes legal logic replace.

Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 64 – 2024, 125-136

134

Exercise 9: In lieu of: gap-filling exercise

TASK: What replaces what in legal terms?

Board meeting, agreement, holiday, payment (2x), resolution, settlement dividend, plan,
penalty
• The …………. in lieu of ………… can be made in cash, or in shares of the
company’s stock.
• …………….. in lieu of ………….. means a contract between the plan-approving
authority and the owner that specifies conservation measures that must be
implemented in the construction of a single-family residence.
• A unanimous written …………… in lieu of a ……………….. is allowed if its
articles of incorporation permit.
• You cannot decide to take ……………….. in lieu of ……………. unless your
employment has terminated, in which case you are entitled to any accrued but
untaken holiday.
• Consideration shall be given to the following factors in deciding the amount of any
penalty or any ……………. in lieu of …………….

6. Enantiosemy
The last category of tricky terms addressed in this paper is enantiosemous terms, which are also
considered to be non-transparent by Böhmerová (2010). Enantiosemy is a case of polysemy, though
perhaps not a widely-known one, in which one sense is in some respect the opposite of another
(Matthews, 2017), which may be especially tricky in legal translation, where translators must be
careful when interpreting such English terms, but also when using such terms when translating into
English. For example, renter is defined by the Cambridge Business Dictionary as “someone who
pays money to use something, or to live in a house, apartment, etc. that someone else owns” but also
as “a person or company that charges money for the use of something that they own”. In other words,
it basically denotes both parties to a lease or rental agreement, and the term is best avoided in
translation into English. This also applies to the related verbs lease, rent, or hire. While the meaning
of these terms may usually be derived from the context, there are others, such as apparent or
qualified, where the interpretation may be more challenging, especially when these are used in multi-
word terms. Thus, a qualified answer may be an answer provided by a qualified professional, but
also an answer with some qualifications.

APPARENT
Meaning 1: able to be seen or understood Meaning 2: seeming to exist or be true
• It was becoming increasingly apparent that he • There are one or two apparent discrepancies
could no longer look after himself. between the two reports.
• I was on the metro this morning when, for no • The apparent cause of death was drowning, but
apparent reason, the man opposite me suddenly further tests were needed.
screamed.

Table 3. Meanings of apparent

Table 3 is used to show the two opposing meanings of apparent to trainees, and Exercise 10 invites
them to discuss the difference in meaning, which is of crucial importance and carries legal
consequences. For a change of topic, the examples in Exercise 10 have been extracted from
homicide/suicide documents. The exercise may be complemented with an in-class discussion of

Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 64 – 2024, 125-136

 135

“pure” legal terms including apparent, such as apparent authority, apparent crime, or apparent
violation.
Exercise 10: Meanings of apparent

TASK: Choose, if possible, which meaning of apparent is implied. Discuss in pairs.

• This case report demonstrates that at times, when no anatomical cause of death is
apparent after a postmortem examination, ancillary testing can lead to diagnosis.
• Vincent van Gogh died on July 29, 1890, from an apparent gunshot wound to the
belly sustained approximately 30 hours earlier.
• Suicides without apparent antecedent causes present great difficulties for medical
examiners and families alike.
• The authors report an unusual case of an apparent homicide/suicide involving two
individuals and a canine that went undetected for almost four years.
• Attending police may suspect robbery as a result of the disarray of the house and
homicide caused by apparent “bleeding” around the body from purging of
putrefactive fluids, injuries from falls, or postmortem animal activity and
“bloodstains” throughout the house.

7. Conclusion
The paper has attempted to present a number of phenomena in legal language that appear in legal
texts and will be encountered by legal translators in their professional practice, but sometimes are
not explicitly addressed in legal translation training because they do not appear in the texts assigned
as translation assignments or they are considered too specific to deserve classroom attention.
However, it is believed that if trainees are made aware of such issues in isolation, they are more likely
to tackle them (more effectively and correctly) in their future practice, as argued by Klabal (2020)
for a host of other legal language phenomena.
Even though the exercises were originally designed for the Czech-English language pair, they can
be used, sometimes without adaptation or with slight adaptation only, for other language pairs
involving English as a source or target language. Some of them aim to raise awareness of the
phenomena, while others aim to build trainees’ confidence. The exercises are versatile in that they
can be used in-class or assigned as homework, or within in a specific module, e.g. on vagueness in
legal translation, or as a quick warm-up exercise. It is hoped that they will find their way into legal
translation classrooms and thus contribute to enhancing legal translation training, and consequently
help legal translators become better at “walking on thin ice of translation of terminology in legal
settings” (Matulewska, 2016).

8. Bibliography:
Alcaraz Varó, E., & Hughes, B. (2002). Legal Translation Explained. St. Jerome.
Anesa, P. (2014). Defining Legal Vagueness: A Contradiction in Terms? Pólemos 8(1): 193-209.
https://doi.org/10.1515/pol-2014-0011
Bázlik, M., & Böhmerová, A. (2019). Legal English and Its Lexical and Grammatical Structure for Czech Lawyers and
Translators: A Proficiency-Level Coursebook Ideal for Both Classroom and Self-Study. Wolters Kluwer.
Black, H. C. (2009). Black's Law Dictionary (9th ed.). West/Thomson Reuters.
Böhmerová, A. (2010). Non-Transparent Legal Terms. In Z. Guldanová (ed.) Teória a prax súdneho prekladu a tlmočenia.
Tlmočnícky ústav Filozofickej fakulty Univerzity Komenského v Bratislave. 82-90.
Chromá, M. (2005). Indeterminacy in Criminal Legislation: A Translator’s Perspective. In V. K. Bhatia et al. (eds.)
Vagueness in Normative Texts, Peter Lang. 28-48.
Chromá, M. (2014). Právní překlad v teorii a praxi: Nový občanský zákoník. Karolinum.
Crystal, D. (1987). The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of Language. Cambridge University Press.

Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 64 – 2024, 125-136

136

Cuñado, F. & Gomez, R. ¿Es razonable tanto «reasonable»? Traducción jurídica. https://traduccionjuridica.es/razonable-
tanto-reasonable/ (accessed 30 May 2023).
Endicott, T. (2005). The Value of Vagueness. In V. K. Bhatia et al. (eds.) Vagueness in Normative Texts, Peter Lang. 28-
48.
Endicott, T. (2011). Vagueness in Law. In G. Ronzitti (ed.) Vagueness: A Guide. Springer. 171-191.
Federal Plain Language Guidelines.
https://www.plainlanguage.gov/guidelines/words/use-simple-words-phrases/ (accessed 10 January 2024)
González-Davies, M. (2004). Multiple Voices in the Translation Classroom. John Benjamins.
Jowers, R. (2021) 50 Pairs of Spanish-English Legal False Friends. Léxico Jurídico Español-Inglés
https://rebeccajowers.com/2021/02/16/50-pairs-of-spanish-english-legal-false-friends/ (accessed 18 February 2024)
Kiraly, D. (2010). A Social Constructivist Approach to Translator Education. St. Jerome.
Klabal, O. (2020). Developing Legal Translation Competence: A Step-by-Step Approach. PhD diss., Palacký University
Olomouc.
Klabal, O. (2022) Synonyms as a Challenge in Legal Translation Training. Białostockie Studia Prawnicze 27(4), 69–82.
https://doi.org/10.15290/bsp.2022.27.04.05
Marmor, A. (2014). The Language of Law. Oxford University Press.
Matthews, P. H. (2007). The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Linguistics (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Matulewska, A. (2016). Walking on thin ice of translation of terminology in legal settings. International Journal of Legal
Discourse, 1(1), 65-85.
Mellinkoff, D. (1963). The Language of the Law. Little, Brown.
Newmark, P. (1993). Paragraphs on translation. Multilingual Matters.
Piecychna, B. (2013) Legal Translation Competence in the Light of Translational Hermeneutics. Studies in Logic, Grammar
and Rhetoric 34 (47), 141–59. https://doi.org/10.2478/slgr-2013-0027
Prieto Ramos, F. (2011). Developing Legal Translation Competence: An Integrative Process-Oriented Approach.
Comparative Legilinguistics: International Journal for Legal Communication 5, 7-21.
https://doi.org/10.14746/cl.2011.5.01
Scarpa, F., & Orlando, D. (2017). What It Takes to Do It Right: An Integrative EMT-based Model for Legal Translation
Competence. Journal of Specialised Translation 27, 21-42.
Soames, S. (2012). “Vagueness and the law”. In A. Marmor (ed.) The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Law.
Routledge.
Tiersma, P. (1999). Legal Language. University of Chicago Press.
Triebel, V. (2009). Pitfalls of English as a Contract Language. In F. Olsen et al. (eds.) Translation Issues in Language and
Law, Palgrave Macmillan. 147–81.
Wiggers, W. J. H. (2011). Drafting Contracts: Techniques, Best Practice Rules and Recommendations Related to Contract
Drafting. Wolters Kluwer.

Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 64 – 2024, 125-136