Kannami Kiyotsugu . By Toyoichirō Nogami. Tokyo, 1949. 8 + 155.

Abstract

noun (see Arts. 5, 11 and 18). Yet iiwatasu and iiwatashi are examples where different usages may require different equivalents. Perhaps out of consideration for the many laymen, military and otherwise, who use this translation in Japan, Blakemore's rendition is often more lucid than literal. Sometimes this reviewer feels confident the freer translation is of positive value, as for instance in Art. 19, page 17 where a tortuous Japanese double negative is avoided. Some linguists may feel that in other passages a greater fidelity to the exact wording of the text could have been achieved without inordinate sacrifice of readability (e.g., Art. 27). Whether in most of the places where the translation is rather free a word-for-word rendition would make a difference in the meaning is difficult to say without specific cases to subject the language to the strain of construction. In most places, Blakemore's translation seems to reflect the meaning adequately. Of course a literal translation would require a use of brackets where the translator has added words for clarity: e.g., Art. 11, p. 11 [punishment]; Art. 18, p. 15 [the Court]; Art. 18, p. 11 [substitute]; Art. 19, p. 17 [commission of a] and [mentioned in the preceding paragraph]; Art. 37, p. 33 [professional or]. Most of the discussion above falls within the range of translating policy or taste. The following mistakes should also be noted: In Art. 25-2, p. 22, the Japanese version omits Sec. 3, whereas the English, p. 23, gives a translation of Sec. 3 but omits Sec. 2. In Art. 34-2, "punishment of detention or minor fine" for bakkin ika should include "fines" (i.e., either "punishments of a fine," "detention or minor fine," or preferably "penalties of a fine or less"). The selection of English equivalents for Japanese legal concepts in the criminal law filed presents some knotty problems beyond the scope of this review. For example, "amnesty" is probably the best equivalent for taisha in Art. 52, p. 41, but it raises the problem of the relationship between amnesty and pardon in American law, and taisha and tokusha in Japanese law. "Attempt" for misuizai in Art. 43 and 44, p. 37 may be as close as a short equivalent can get, but cases of voluntary abandonment of the criminal intent is grounds for mitigation in the Japanese law but not in the American law. A legal concept from one legal system in its application usually covers factual situations which do not coincide precisely with the best equivalent concept from another legal system, hence a translation is at best an approximation. In general Blakemore has achieved an admirable approximation.