Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
PECULIARITIES OF THE TRANSLATION OF TERMS PERTAINING TO ARBITRATION
TERM PAPER
2
ANOTĀCIJA
Šis darbs satur analīzi par tēmu Ar šķīrējtiesu saistītu terminu tulkošanas īpatnības.
Terminu tulkojumu regulē vesela virkne noteikumu, un to ietekmē vairāki faktori.
Šķīrējtiesa ir antīks jēdziens, lai gan ar to saistītā terminoloģija vēl joprojām attīstās.
Šī darba mērķis ir noskaidrot, vai terminoloģijas izstrādes tendences latviešu valodā
un iepriekšējie tulkojumi iespaido terminu tulkošanu no angļu valodas uz latviešu
valodu. Lai iegūtu informāciju par terminoloģiju un šķīrējtiesām, tika analizēta
zinātniskā literatūra. Turklāt, tika veikta kontrastīvā analīze un sastādīts saraksts ar
terminiem, to tulkojumiem un piemēriem, lai ilustrētu to, ka terminu tulkošanu no
angļu valodas uz latviešu valodu ietekmē terminu izstrādes tendences latviešu valodā.
Visbeidzot, tika izdarīti secinājumi.
Atslēgas vārdi: termini, terminoloģija, angļu, latviešu, jēdzieni, tulkošana, iespaids,
šķīrējtiesa, tiesa.
3
ABSTRACT
This paper conveys an analysis of Peculiarities of the Translation of Terms Pertaining
to Arbitration. The translation of terms and terminology is regulated by a complex of
set rules and must be approached from numerous aspects. Arbitration is an antique
concept, though the terminology associated with it still evolves. The aim of this paper
is to find out if the transfer of terms from English into Latvian is influenced by trends
in term formation in the target language and also by antecedent translations. In order
to gain background knowledge about terminology and arbitration, literature review
was carried out. Furthermore, contrastive analysis was done and a list of terms, their
translations with examples was comprised in order to illustrate that the transfer of
terms is influenced by trends in the target language, and, finally, relevant conclusions
were drawn.
Key words: terms, terminology, English, Latvian, concepts, transfer, influence,
arbitration, court, jurisdiction.
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction....................................................................................................................61. Literature Review...................................................................................................8
1.1. Basic Concepts of Terms and Terminology...................................................81.1.1. Overview of the Development of Terminology in Latvia......................91.1.2. History of the Development of Terminology in Latvia.......................10
1.2. Definitions of Arbitration.............................................................................111.2.1. History of Arbitration...........................................................................111.2.2. History of Arbitration in Latvia...........................................................12
1.3. Development of Latvian Arbitration Terminology......................................121.4. Factors Influencing the Transfer of Terms Partaining to Arbitration..........121.5. Peculiarities of the Transfer of Terms Pertaining to Arbitration.................14
2. Comparative Analysis..........................................................................................16Conclusions..................................................................................................................20Theses...........................................................................................................................22Bibliography.................................................................................................................23
5
0 INTRODUCTION
The fact that arbitration is in no way a new phenomenon can be verified by tracing the
term itself back to its origins. The term "arbiter" originated in the 15th century and
gained its meaning "one chosen by two disputing parties to decide the matter" in the
1540s1. William Herbert Page writes that the method of settling controversies and
disputes by means of arbitration seems to be one of immemorial antiquity in English
law as indeed it is in practically every system of law (1919). The appeal of settling
disputes with the use of arbitration instead of litigation in court is said to be the fact
that it seems to be less expensive, significantly faster and, ultimately, more efficient
than taking an argument to court in most cases, because the procedures have fewer
requirements (Online 8).
Though, obviously, because of its appeal for those who wish to settle their disputes
with less inconvenience and sooner, arbitration has been a popular topic for a while
now, in recent years, the chapter of the Latvian Civil Procedure Law that deals with
arbitration courts has been amended to require every arbitration court to register with
the Commercial Register, send in their rules of procedure (the regulations for which
were also amended in this law) and redefine the types of cases that can be taken to an
arbitration court (Online 9). According to the Commercial Register, there are a total
of 143 arbitration courts operating in Latvia at this time (Online 10).
As it is with every branch of science, arbitration possesses its own set of terms, or
terminology - a systematically compiled set of words, each of which, ideally, denotes
a separate concept. If a concept and the term for this concept have originated outside
the target language, a term has to be created also in the target language when the new
concept arrives.
The hypothesis of the paper is as follows: the transfer of terms from English into
Latvian through translation is influenced by trends in term formation in the target
language and antecedent translations.
1 Online Etymology Dictionary. Available from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=arbitration&searchmode=none [Accessed January 2, 2011].
6
The Enabling Objectives
1. To examine the general characteristic of a term and the requirements for a
term;
2. To consider the main concepts of terminology, translation, as well as to study
lexical and semantic aspects of term formation;
3. To get acquitted with the transfer of terms from one language into another,
such as the translation of terms;
4. To analyze the terms pertaining to arbitration, during the translation process
from English into Latvian.
The methods of research of the paper are as follows:
Theoretical: studying and analyzing the relevant theories regarding terms and
their formation, terminology, and translation;
Practical: comparative analysis of the transfer of arbitration terminology from
English into Latvian, drawing conclusions.
7
1. LITERATURE REVIEW
The first part of the present research paper deals with the theoretical aspect of the
research. Literature review was undertaken to acquire background information about
the subject matter of research. Chapter 1 discusses the general and most basic
concepts of terms and terminology, their development in Latvia, and the history of
this process. Chapter II analyses definitions of arbitration proceeding with the
discussion of the development of Latvian arbitration terminology is discussed in
Chapter III. Finally, Chapters IV and V discuss factors that influence the transfer of
terms from English to Latvian and the peculiarities of the transfer of terms from
English to Latvian, respectively.
1.1. BASIC CONCEPTS OF TERMS AND TERMINOLOGY
What a term is has been defined numerous times and can even be found in
dictionaries, however, according to Valentīna Skujiņa, the foundation of
understanding the concepts of terms is the opinion that the term is not a substantial
unit but a functional one. This means that the term is not a special lexical unit, but a
word performing a special function. The area of usage and the functional meaning of
a term is what gives the lexical unit its’ terminological properties and the essence of a
functional unit (1993: 7).
Regarding the areas which utilize terms and require development of terminology,
Skujiņa goes on to state that these areas include various scientific fields, as well as
practical (professional and industrial) fields (ibid.).
According to the broad functional meaning of “term”, it stands for an object which is
related to a person’s sphere of activity (not only scientific, but also professional and
industrial), also a dialect word or colloquial word. However, in the narrower meaning,
a “term” is considered to be used in the area of science and is a word which has a
specific place in the system of concepts of a branch of science. This system dictates
the functional meaning of each term (ibid. :7-8).
8
As regards the qualities and requirements for a term, Skujiņa writes that the
requirements are as follows: systematicality, the precision of meaning, the brevity of
form (terms are required to be short and concise), monosemy, mononymity,
contextual independence, emotional neutrality, etc (ibid. : 9). This means that, not
only does a term need to have no more than one meaning per concept, but also be as
unambiguous as possible, so as to be successfully utilized.
Regarding the meaning of “terminology”, in the broader meaning, it is a body of
terms within a language. In the narrower meaning, it is a body of terms in a subject of
study, profession, etc (ibid. : 33). The complicated disposition of terminology and the
position of it within a language is, perhaps, best described by Maria Teresa Cabré: as
an intersectional and multidisciplinary science, terminology is located at the
crossroads of a large number of subdisciplines of linguistics (semantics or differential
lexicology, among others), but it is not their preserve (1998: 10-11).
1.1.1. OVERVIEW OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF TERMINOLOGY IN LATVIA
When discussing the development of terminology in Latvia, the various aspects from
which it must be approached have to be taken into consideration. According to
Valentīna Skujiņa, given that terminology is a language unit, it has to be viewed from
the morphological, phonetic, syntactical and lexical aspects. This means that, in the
development of terms, such problems should be considered: the usage of the
categories of the noun, the adjective, and the participle, the selection of consonants
and vowels, hyphenation, hard dash combinations, multi-word components, etc (1993:
29).
The aspects, from which Latvian terminology is approached, are not the only origin of
problems when thinking about terminology and the transfer of terms. Andrejs
Veisbergs says that the Latvian language and, especially, terminology have
characteristics that create problems, when stacked together: i.e. specificity (2005: 61).
Furthermore, if terminology is to be approached from an inter-linguistic point of view,
Skujiņa says that terminology deals with borrowings and contacts between languages
9
and, thus, a different spectre of problems need consideration, i.e., the relation between
international words and new terms of local origin (1993: 214).
From an administrative point of view, terms are developed and approved by a number
of institutions in Latvia. According to an informational report done by the Translation
and Terminology Centre, among them are the Terminology Commission of the
Latvian Academy of Sciences, the State Language Commission, the State Language
Centre, the State Language Agency, and others. Each of these institutions is under
different management, for example, the State Language Commission is overseen by
the President, while the State Language Centre is under the Ministry of Justice (6: 15-
16).
1.1.2. HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF TERMINOLOGY IN LATVIA
As noted by Valentīna Skujiņa, the first Latvian terms can be traced back to the 16th
century, when Latvian Religious Terminology appears. Later, in the 18th century, with
the appearance of contemporary publications, came the foundation of Latvian
Terminology for various branches. However, the first scientific selection and
formation of terms appears 3 centuries after the first Latvian terms – in the various
textbooks and manuals for the many branches of science and technology,
terminological dictionaries, and articles, in which relevant problems of terminology
were discussed – all published in Latvian in the second half of the 19th century. K.
Valdemārs is closely connected to the early stages of development for Latvian
terminology because he released a “Maritime Dictionary” in 1881. In the dictionary
maritime terms are provided in 11 languages (1993: 14-15).
Maria Teresa Cabré differentiates 4 periods of the development of modern
terminology (1998: 5), the latter of which is marked by the start of the computer
technology boom. Cabré: computer science is one of the most important forces behind
changes in terminology. Terminologists now have at their disposal tools and resources
that are better adapted to their needs, more user-friendly and more effective (ibid. : 6).
Although Cabré talks about terminology on a global scale, the same progress could
also be witnessed in Latvia, as soon as computer technology was available.
10
Nowadays, Computer Assisted Translating (CAT) tools (i.e. SDL Trados, Logoport)
are available so that terminology can be easily shared and kept coherent among
countless projects (and translators) within in a company and outside of it (Online 1).
1.2. DEFINITIONS OF ARBITRATION
The dictionary describes “arbitration” as the process of judging officially how an
argument should be settled2. In it’s meaning, this explanation is repeated throughout
other dictionaries3 and internet articles (Online 2; Online 3). This means that the
mononimity and monosemity on an international level is present, when talking about
arbitration.
1.2.1. HISTORY OF ARBITRATION
History of arbitration can be approached from a number of ways, however, in this
research, to approach it from an international point of view would be best.
In Britain, according to William Herbert Page, in the earliest reports of cases,
arbitration seems to be assumed as a well-established method of settling disputes. The
early digests show that arbitration was assumed as a sufficient discharge, and that the
courts were already elaborating the details and discussing problems which were much
the same as those which trouble contemporary courts, after making due allowance for
the different economic and social conditions of the times (1919).
In the United States, while quoting Richard C. Bales, Robert V. Massey writes about
arbitration: long before the white man ever arrived in what is now the United States
early Native American tribes used arbitration as not only a means to resolve disputes
within the tribe but also as a means to resolve disputes between different tribes.
George Washington, our nation’s first president, had an arbitration clause in his will
that basically stated that if any dispute should arise over the wording of the document
that a panel of three arbitrators would be implemented to render a final and binding
2 Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, Fifth Edition. (2009) Essex: Longman.3 Concise Oxford English Dictionary (2006) Oxford University Press
11
decision to resolve the dispute. President Washington stated that he considered any
arbitration decisions rendered from his will to be as final and binding as is any
decision of the Supreme Court of the United States (1). He goes on to conclude that
arbitration is clearly not a phenomenon of the twentieth century nor is it an American
invention (ibid. : 3).
1.2.2. HISTORY OF ARBITRATION IN LATVIA
Historically, acts of arbitration can be traced back to the 13th and 14th century, when
the Livonian order struggled with the Catholic Church over Zemgale (Semigallia)
(Online 5). However, in the modern sense of arbitration, the first arbitration courts in
Latvia were formed in 1999. To form an arbitration court, it needs to be registered in
the Commercial Register and at this time there are 135 registered arbitration courts in
Latvia. Arbitration courts can be formed specifically for the purpose of settling a
concrete argument but can also operate on a regular basis (Online 4).
1.3. DEVELOPMENT OF LATVIAN ARBITRATION TERMINOLOGY
Since arbitration is a very old method of settling disputes between people and even
disputes between different nations (1999), the history of the development of terms
relating to it is as long. However, if arbitration terminology is discussed in the modern
sense, recent Latvian history has to be divided into two periods: the period of the
Latvian SSR (Soviet Socialist Republic – Padomju sociālistiskā republika in Latvian)
which spanned from 1944 till 1990, and the period of Latvia’s independence starting
from 1990 (the declaration of independence, and the actual restoration of
independence in 1991). This distinction has to be made because, as with the collapse
of the USSR, arbitration changed its character reverting to the performance of
functions that it had earlier (8: 28).
1.4. FACTORS INFLUENCING THE TRANSFER OF TERMS PERTAINING TO ARBITRATION
12
The transfer of terms pertaining to arbitration from English into Latvian is influenced
by a number of factors. Firstly, the possible ignorance of the concepts that underlie
the transferable terms may greatly influence the process. The concept may not be fully
understood in the target language's environment, or may not exist at all. Although
arbitration is a fairly old concept, there are still instances where there is incoherence
when dealing with terms with perceivably identical concepts; i.e., the inconsistency in
some texts with the use of “arbitrāža" and "šķīrējtiesa" (this will be discussed in the
next subchapter).
Secondly, the syntactical compatibility of the two languages may not be very high.
This means, for example, that in Latvian when trying to transfer a term that is more
complex and cannot be expressed in one word, multi-word translations are needed
(1993). This opens up a whole new selection of problems because the syntactical rules
for multi-word terms in Latvian have to be taken in to consideration (ibid. : 105)
According to Valentīna Skujiņa, the goal of practical terminology is to create a system
of unequivocal terms in various sciences and branches of technology. In order to
specify which branches are related (i.e. geology, geomorphology), which branches are
base branches (i.e. physics, math), and which branches are secondary branches (i.e.
biophysics, radio electronics), a hierarchy must be established (ibid. :187-188).
Taking this into consideration, arbitration terms belong to the secondary branches, so
terms that are present in the base branch (which is the judiciary branch), should be
retained in order to sustain the systematical nature of the terminology.
When talking about factors which influence the transfer of terms from the source
language into the target language, one must also mention the influence of extra-
linguistic factors (ibid.). Translation (of terms or otherwise) is done by humans and,
as Alexander Pope has put it, "to err is human", so the human factor of making honest
mistakes out of ignorance or hastiness cannot be excluded when talking about these
factors.
However, there is at least one factor that influences the translation of terms from one
language to another in a positive way, too. The internet and the digitalisation of
translating, makes life easier in a number of ways. One, a translator can easily check
13
up on relevant information on the internet regarding their source text. Two, if a team
of translators have been working on similar texts or with texts that are from the same
project, they can use their computerized database (TM’s – translation memories) to
not only find translations of terms (this way it is easy to upkeep coherence throughout
the translations – one just finds the terms that have been utilized the most and goes
with those terms), but to find complete sentences and even paragraphs that have
already been translated.
1.5. PECULIARITIES OF THE TRANSFER OF TERMS PERTAINING TO ARBITRATION
As it has already been mentioned above, although arbitration, as a concept, has been
known for a long time, one can still witness inconsistencies regarding the use of
terminology. One of the issues this paper will address is the use of “arbitrāža” and
“šķīrējtiesa” in Latvian. Dictionaries only fuel the confusion, because, for example,
the translation for the term "to arbitrate" is provided as "nodot arbitrāžai (šķīrējtiesai)”
and “izlemt arbitrāžā (šķīrējtiesā)”.4 As one can see, in this case, the terms are
presented as complete synonyms.
Furthermore, upon looking up both “šķīrējtiesa” and “arbitrāža” in the Dictionary of
Judicial Terms, one would find that both terms are described as arbitration courts in
which a neutral third party settles disputes5. Again, when describing one term (or its
derivatives), the other (or its derivatives) is used in brackets, for example, “arbitrāža”
is described as “šķīrējtiesa, kurā strīdu starp pusēm izšķir neitrāla persona –
šķīrējtiesnesis (arbitrs)”. Moreover, to further illustrate that these differences are of
incoherent nature, it should be pointed out that different authors described each term;
"arbitrāža" was described by G. Kūtris and “sķīrējtiesa” by J. Rozenbergs.
Another issue that shall be discussed is the translation of the term “arbitration award”.
Upon reviewing translations of documents regarding arbitration, it is apparent that the
translation of the term “arbitration award” has a number of versions. "Spriedums",
“nolēmums”, and “lēmums”. It should be pointed out that "nolēmums” is the
4 Angļu – Latviešu Vārdnīca. (1997) Rīga: “Jāņa sēta”5 Juridisko terminu vārdnīca. (1998) Rīga: NORDIK
14
translation provided in the homepage of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of
Latvia as part of a list of terms approved by the Terminology Committee of the
Latvian Academy of Sciences (Online 6) and is used, for instance, in the Civil
Procedure Law; however, in the translations available in the translation catalogue of
the State Language Centre (Online 7), “spriedums” is used.
15
2. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
This chapter deals with the practical aspect of the research. In light of the information
gained in Literature Review, Comparative analysis was carried out in order to analyze
the transfer of arbitration Terminology from English into Latvian.
The terms, their translations, examples and etymology listed here are taken from
various English dictionaries, several international conventions regarding arbitration,
the Latvian Civil Procedure Law, and online term banks and databases.
English Term Latvian Term
Example of term being in use Etymology
arbitration 1. nodošana arbitrāžai (šķīrējtiesai)
2. arbitrāžas (šķīrējtiesas) lēmums
Each Contracting State shall recognize
an agreement in writing under which the
parties undertake to submit to arbitration
all or any differences which have arisen
or which may arise between them in
respect of a defined legal relationship,
whether contractual or not, concerning a
subject matter capable of settlement by
arbitration (Online 11).
Late 14c., "absolute decision," from
O.Fr. arbitracion, from L. arbitrationem
(nom. arbitratio) "judgment, will," noun
of action from pp. stem of arbitrari, from
arbiter. Meaning "settlement of a dispute
by a third party" is from 1630s
(etymology dict).
arbitral (adjective) 1. arbitrāžas-
2. šķīrējtiesas
arbitral awards 1. šķīrējtiesas nolēmums
2. šķīrējtiesas lēmums
3. šķīrējtiesas spriedums
The term "arbitral awards" shall include
not only awards made by arbitrators
appointed for each case but also those
made by permanent arbitral bodies to
which the parties have submitted (Online
16
11).
arbitration awards 1. šķīrējtiesas nolēmums
2. šķīrējtiesas lēmums
3. šķīrējtiesas spriedums
arbitration board šķīrējinstitūcija
arbitral tribunal šķīrējtiesa
If a dispute between the Contracting
Parties cannot thus be settled within six
months after the beginning of
negotiations, it shall upon the request of
either Contracting Party be submitted to
an arbitral tribunal (Online 11).
arbitration court šķīrējtiesa
submit to an arbitral court nodot izskatīšanai šķīrējtiesā
arbitrary discrimination patvaļīga diskriminācija
arbitrator 1. šķīrējtiesnesis
2. arbitrs, šķīrējtiesnesis
arbiter arbitrs, šķīrējtiesnesis
arbitrage arbitrāža, šķīrējtiesa
arbitrament arbitrāžas (šķīrējtiesas) lēmums
arbitrate 1. nodot arbitrāžai (šķīrējtiesai)
2. izlemt arbitrāžā (šķīrējtiesā)
arbitral clause šķīrējtiesas piezīme
The term "agreement in writing" shall
include an arbitral clause in a contract
or an arbitration agreement, signed by
the parties or contained in an exchange
of letters or telegrams (Online 11).
domestic award iekšējs nolēmums
It shall also apply to arbitral awards not
considered as domestic awards in the
State where their recognition and
enforcement are sought (Online 11).
17
agreement in writing rakstveida nolīgums
contracting state līgumslēdzēja valsts
The court of a Contracting State, when
seized of an action in a matter in respect
of which the parties have made an
agreement within the meaning of this
article, shall, at the request of one of the
parties, refer the parties to arbitration,
unless it finds that the said agreement is
null and void, inoperative or incapable of
being performed (Online 11).
recognition and enforcement atzīšana un izpildīšana
Recognition and enforcement of the
award may be refused, at the request of
the party against whom it is invoked…
(Online 11)
party puse
arbitration proceedings šķīrējtiesas izskatīšana
The party against whom the award is
invoked was not given proper notice of
the appointment of the arbitrator or of
the arbitration proceedings or was
otherwise unable to present his case…
(Online 11)
difference strīds
conciliation samierināšana
The purpose of the Centre shall be to
provide facilities for conciliation and
arbitration of investment disputes
between Contracting States and nationals
of other Contracting States in accordance
with the provisions of this Convention
18
(Online 13).
amiable compositeur samierinātājs
The arbitral tribunal shall decide as
amiable compositeur or ex aequo et bono
only if the parties have expressly
authorized the arbitral tribunal to do so
and if the law applicable to the arbitral
procedure permits such arbitration
(Online 12).
arbitrability arbitrabilitāte
rules of procedure reglaments
As one can see, there are a few general trends in the transfer of terms pertaining to
probation. Firstly, terms such as "arbitration", "to arbitrate", or "arbitral" are still
translated using “arbitrāža” and “šķīrējtiesa.
Secondly, the term "arbitration awards" has been frequently translated in three
different ways as “lēmums”, “nolēmums”, and “spriedums”. Although, in Latvian, the
three translations effectively have the same meaning, the basic requirements of
creating terms are not being followed in this case – there is more than one term for a
single concept. If paired with the different kinds or arbitration awards, these variations
can produce numerous similar terms.
Finally, from a hierarchal point of view, the terms that are used in a wider spectrum,
meaning the terms that pertain to not only the sub-branch, arbitration, but also to the
base branch, which is jurisdiction, are in accordance to the terminology of the base
branch. For example, the translations for "party", "contracting country" and other
terms are translated as "puse" and "līgumslēdzēja valsts".
19
CONCLUSIONS
After having analysed the relevant theories regarding arbitration terms and
terminology, their formation, and arbitration as a phenomenon, and having performed
comparative analysis, conclusions can be drawn.
A well-developed terminology can be compared to an intricate web; each strand,
meaning term, is unique, connected, and has its own purpose. The Latvian “web” of
arbitration, however, is not completely unified. It is divided due to the fact that there
were different translation tendencies before and after the fall of the Soviet regime.
Because of the fact that arbitration is a centuries-old phenomenon, a large portion of
the terminology it pertains to is also inherently old and, as the professionals of a trade,
not linguists, are not only the ones who often coin new terms, but also determine with
their actions the frequency of usage of a term and if the term is being used
appropriately (especially, in highly specific fields), certain elements of tradition and
habits come in to play. For example, a lawyer may continuously use a dated term
inappropriately driven only by the force of habit or tradition. This, in turn, may
influence other, younger professionals to also use the dated term, not the newer
approved term. This could be prevented by publishing newsletters with newly and
recently approved terms not only to individual subscribers but also, after having
established the necessary connections, straight to companies and offices, which could,
in turn, inform their employees, the professionals, of relevant changes in the
terminology.
Even though arbitration is not a new concept, new terms will be emerging
nonetheless. This is because of the fact both arbitration and the language that
surrounds it evolve. However, this is not the biggest problem for translators. The fact
that a term can have several translations in the target language that all have virtually
synonymous meanings, may lead to confusion and incoherency in the legislation. If
terminologists and translators would pay more attention to the standards set for term
formation (systematicality, precision of meaning, brevity of form, monosemy,
20
monomity, and contextual independence) and also harmonisation of terms (in order to
get rid of unneeded synonyms), these problems could be avoided.
As regards the hypothesis of this term paper, the translation of arbitration terminology
from English into Latvian is most certainly influenced by trends of term formation in
the target language and antecedent translations, because the manner in which terms
are coined is influenced by the ruling (at that moment) attitude towards, i.e.,
borrowings.
In the future, this research may be further expanded in several directions. The main
two directions are as follows: first, it would be interesting to examine other fields of
jurisdiction and the terminology pertaining to them. This would help in finding out if
the conclusions reached in this research regarding influences on term translation apply
to other fields of jurisdiction as well. The second direction could be seen as less
connected to this research than the first. Nonetheless, it may be useful to research how
Computer Assisted Translation tools affect the translation of terms pertaining to
arbitration, jurisdiction in general, or even other fields of science.
21
THESES
1. Arbitration is a centuries-old phenomenon that still retains its popularity
because of the fact that, as a means of settling disputes, it is less costly, faster
and more effective than litigation in court.
2. A term is a functional unit that denotes concepts and should be systematic,
with a single, precise meaning, as well as contextually independent, and
emotionally neutral.
3. Internationally, arbitration has deep roots in the British Law system, as well as
in that of the United States; however, in Latvia, the first acts of arbitration can
be traced back to the 13th and 14th centuries when the struggle between the
Livonian order and the Catholic Church was active.
4. While under the Soviet regime, in Latvia, the meaning and functions of
“arbitration” shifted from what they were before and were reverted back after
the fall of the USSR.
5. The transfer of terms pertaining to arbitration is subject to the influence of the
possible ignorance of translators, the syntactical compatibility of the source
and target languages, hierarchal relations between the branch and sub-branch
to which the terminology belongs to, the possibility of human error, and
Computer Assisted Translation tools.
6. In Latvian, several inconsistencies in the usage of “arbitrāža” and
“šķīrējtiesa”, as well as “nolēmums”, “lēmums”, and “spriedums”, can be
found.
22
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Massey, R. V. History of Arbitration and Grievance Arbitration in the United
States. West Virginia: WV University Extension Service Institute for Labour
Studies and Research;
2. Skujiņa, V. (1993) Latviešu terminoloģijas izstrādes principi. R.: Zinātne;
3. Elkouri & Elkouri. (1999) How Arbitration Works, Fifth Edition;
4. Cabré, M. T. (1998) Terminology: Theory, Methods and Applications.
Terminology: Theory, Methods and Applications;
5. Veisbergs, A. (2005) Mutvārdu tulkošanas pamati. Rīga: LU Sastatāmās
valodniecības un tulkošanas nodaļa;
6. Tulkošanas un terminoloģijas centrs. (2005) Situācijas izpēte latviešu
terminoloģijas izstrādes, saskaņošanas un apstiprināšanas jomā. Rīga:
Tulkošanas un terminoloģijas centrs;
7. Page, W. H. (1919) The Law of Contracts, Vol.4. The W. H. Anderson
Company
8. Baldunčiks, J. (2008) Terminoloģiskie mutanti mūsdienu latviešu valodā.
Valodas prakse: vērojumi un ieteikumi, 1 (3): 26-37;
9. Sīlis, J. (2008) Tulkojumzinātnes jautājumi, Teorija un prakse. Ventspils:
VeA.
Dictionaries
Concise Oxford English Dictionary (2006) Oxford University Press
Angļu – Latviešu Vārdnīca (1997) Rīga “Jāņa sēta”
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, Fifth Edition. (2009) Essex:
Longman.
Juridisko terminu vārdnīca. (1998) Rīga: NORDIK
Internet
1. http://www.trados.com/en/ [Accessed on January 2, 2011]
23
2. http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/arbitration/what-is-arb.html [Accessed on January
2, 2011]
3. http://www.mediate.com/articles/grant.cfm [Accessed on January 2, 2011]
4. http://ec.europa.eu/civiljustice/adr/adr_lat_lv.htm [Accessed on January 2,
2011]
5. http://www.historia.lv/alfabets/Z/Ze/zemgales_biskapija/
zemgales_biskapija.htm [Accessed on January 2, 2011]
6. http://www.mk.gov.lv/vk/starpinstitucijas-sanaksmes-komisijas/es-
terminologijas-starpinstituciju-darba-grupu-sanaksmes/apstiprinatie-termini/
[Accessed on January 2, 2011]
7. http://www.vvc.gov.lv/advantagecms/LV/tulkojumi/dokumenti.html
[Accessed on January 2, 2011]
8. http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Apr/1/130510.html [Accessed on January 2,
2011]
9. http://www.ur.gov.lv/_old/drukat.php?t=8&id=1013&v=lv [Accessed on
January 2, 2011]
10. http://www.ur.gov.lv/_old/index.php?t=3&a=172&v=lv#skirejtiesas
[Accessed on January 2, 2011]
11. http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/arbitration/NY-conv/
1958_NYC_CTC-e.pdf [Accessed on January 2, 2011]
12. http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/arbitration/ml-arb/07-
86998_Ebook.pdf [Accessed on January 2, 2011]
13. http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/
icsid.settlement.of.disputes.between.states.and.nationals.of.other.states.conven
tion.washington.1965/ [Accessed on January 2, 2011]
24
