{"title":"从公证员的角度看埃利希的解决规范:术语问题","authors":"V. Savchuk","doi":"10.31861/EHRLICHSJOURNAL2019.03.046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article (from the point of view of the notary) analyses the question of the proper translation of the Ehrlich term \"Entscheidungsnormen\" in Ukrainian, English, and Russian. The number of possible translations is divided into two groups: those that retain the degree of uncertainty of the German word, and those with a higher degree of certainty that the German word, and simultaneously transmit the meaning that E. Ehrlich invested in it. The first group includes such variants as: \"norms of a decision\" or \"norms of decisions\" (Marchuk, Antonov), \"norms-decisions\" (Truten, Begun, Dorosh), \"norms of judgment\" (Truten) or \"decisive norms\" or \"decision norms\" (hypothetically), and the second – \"norms for decision\" and \"norms for resolution\". The arguments in the article mostly linguistic (the possibility of taking the basis of the translation by Marchuk, the value of the preposition \"for\" in Ukrainian, the tradition of translating into English, etc.) are allowed in the article to select such a translation option as \"rules for resolution\". The translation of \"Entscheidungsnormen\" as \"rules for resolution\" allows us: to specify the function that these rules fulfil; to demonstrate the genesis of such norms; to outline the range of those to whom the word relates. And finally to emphasize the difference between the norm and the law, etc. Standards for resolution are not only rules that are relevant to the judge, but also rules that interact with the activities, in particular, notaries. The article outlines the possibilities of methodological problematization of such a phrase-term. That is his potential, which may have significance for modern, first of all, Ukrainian, jurisprudence, as well as legal practice.","PeriodicalId":191182,"journal":{"name":"Erlìhìvsʹkij žurnal","volume":"27 3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ehrlich’s Norms for Solving from the Point of View of the Notary: to the Question of Terminology\",\"authors\":\"V. Savchuk\",\"doi\":\"10.31861/EHRLICHSJOURNAL2019.03.046\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article (from the point of view of the notary) analyses the question of the proper translation of the Ehrlich term \\\"Entscheidungsnormen\\\" in Ukrainian, English, and Russian. The number of possible translations is divided into two groups: those that retain the degree of uncertainty of the German word, and those with a higher degree of certainty that the German word, and simultaneously transmit the meaning that E. Ehrlich invested in it. The first group includes such variants as: \\\"norms of a decision\\\" or \\\"norms of decisions\\\" (Marchuk, Antonov), \\\"norms-decisions\\\" (Truten, Begun, Dorosh), \\\"norms of judgment\\\" (Truten) or \\\"decisive norms\\\" or \\\"decision norms\\\" (hypothetically), and the second – \\\"norms for decision\\\" and \\\"norms for resolution\\\". The arguments in the article mostly linguistic (the possibility of taking the basis of the translation by Marchuk, the value of the preposition \\\"for\\\" in Ukrainian, the tradition of translating into English, etc.) are allowed in the article to select such a translation option as \\\"rules for resolution\\\". The translation of \\\"Entscheidungsnormen\\\" as \\\"rules for resolution\\\" allows us: to specify the function that these rules fulfil; to demonstrate the genesis of such norms; to outline the range of those to whom the word relates. And finally to emphasize the difference between the norm and the law, etc. Standards for resolution are not only rules that are relevant to the judge, but also rules that interact with the activities, in particular, notaries. The article outlines the possibilities of methodological problematization of such a phrase-term. That is his potential, which may have significance for modern, first of all, Ukrainian, jurisprudence, as well as legal practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":191182,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Erlìhìvsʹkij žurnal\",\"volume\":\"27 3 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Erlìhìvsʹkij žurnal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31861/EHRLICHSJOURNAL2019.03.046\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Erlìhìvsʹkij žurnal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31861/EHRLICHSJOURNAL2019.03.046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文(从公证人的角度)分析了埃利希语“Entscheidungsnormen”在乌克兰语、英语和俄语中的正确翻译问题。可能的翻译数量分为两组:一类保留了德语单词的不确定性程度,另一类具有比德语单词更高的确定性程度,同时传递了埃利希赋予它的意义。第一组包括以下变体:“决策规范”或“决策规范”(Marchuk, Antonov),“决策规范”(Truten, Begun, Dorosh),“判断规范”(Truten)或“决定性规范”或“决策规范”(假设),第二组-“决策规范”和“解决规范”。文章中的论据主要是语言学上的(以Marchuk翻译为基础的可能性,乌克兰语中介词“for”的值,翻译成英语的传统等),文章允许选择“rules for resolution”这样的翻译选项。将“Entscheidungsnormen”翻译为“解决规则”允许我们:指定这些规则履行的功能;证明这些规范的起源;勾勒出与这个词有关的人的范围。最后强调规范和法律的区别,等等。决议标准不仅是与法官相关的规则,而且是与活动互动的规则,特别是与公证员互动的规则。文章概述了在方法论上对这一短语进行问题化的可能性。这就是他的潜力,这可能对现代,首先是乌克兰的法理学,以及法律实践具有重要意义。
Ehrlich’s Norms for Solving from the Point of View of the Notary: to the Question of Terminology
The article (from the point of view of the notary) analyses the question of the proper translation of the Ehrlich term "Entscheidungsnormen" in Ukrainian, English, and Russian. The number of possible translations is divided into two groups: those that retain the degree of uncertainty of the German word, and those with a higher degree of certainty that the German word, and simultaneously transmit the meaning that E. Ehrlich invested in it. The first group includes such variants as: "norms of a decision" or "norms of decisions" (Marchuk, Antonov), "norms-decisions" (Truten, Begun, Dorosh), "norms of judgment" (Truten) or "decisive norms" or "decision norms" (hypothetically), and the second – "norms for decision" and "norms for resolution". The arguments in the article mostly linguistic (the possibility of taking the basis of the translation by Marchuk, the value of the preposition "for" in Ukrainian, the tradition of translating into English, etc.) are allowed in the article to select such a translation option as "rules for resolution". The translation of "Entscheidungsnormen" as "rules for resolution" allows us: to specify the function that these rules fulfil; to demonstrate the genesis of such norms; to outline the range of those to whom the word relates. And finally to emphasize the difference between the norm and the law, etc. Standards for resolution are not only rules that are relevant to the judge, but also rules that interact with the activities, in particular, notaries. The article outlines the possibilities of methodological problematization of such a phrase-term. That is his potential, which may have significance for modern, first of all, Ukrainian, jurisprudence, as well as legal practice.