法庭解释的模因探索

IF 2 Q1 LINGUISTICS
Jian Li, N. Ye, A. Wagner
{"title":"法庭解释的模因探索","authors":"Jian Li, N. Ye, A. Wagner","doi":"10.1515/ijld-2019-2022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Court interpretation subsumes transferring information from one source culture to the target culture, and the transfer of information, from the perspective of memetics, leads to the conceptualization of a common and significant framework in legal discourse, especially in the translation, interpretation and communication fields. This consideration gives the theoretical assumption for court interpretation, that is, court interpretation is a bilingual practice of meaning construction beyond meaning replication, because meaning units could be viewed as self-replicating complex ideas. Since the purpose of court interpretation is to find equivalence and the functions of court interpreters are being fair, semiotic equivalence can provide an even more useful tool for interpreters by offering greater insight into the mechanism of meaning and its encoding with the help of linguistic symbols. Meanwhile, court interpreters act as language and culture mediators to convey the correct contents of utterances and/or speech acts among their communities. Active and collaborative works are then necessary to mediate, decide, and analyze under real constraints with cultural challenges to elaborate viable interpretation solutions in laws.","PeriodicalId":55934,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Legal Discourse","volume":"11 1","pages":"181 - 196"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A memetic exploration of court interpretation\",\"authors\":\"Jian Li, N. Ye, A. Wagner\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/ijld-2019-2022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Court interpretation subsumes transferring information from one source culture to the target culture, and the transfer of information, from the perspective of memetics, leads to the conceptualization of a common and significant framework in legal discourse, especially in the translation, interpretation and communication fields. This consideration gives the theoretical assumption for court interpretation, that is, court interpretation is a bilingual practice of meaning construction beyond meaning replication, because meaning units could be viewed as self-replicating complex ideas. Since the purpose of court interpretation is to find equivalence and the functions of court interpreters are being fair, semiotic equivalence can provide an even more useful tool for interpreters by offering greater insight into the mechanism of meaning and its encoding with the help of linguistic symbols. Meanwhile, court interpreters act as language and culture mediators to convey the correct contents of utterances and/or speech acts among their communities. Active and collaborative works are then necessary to mediate, decide, and analyze under real constraints with cultural challenges to elaborate viable interpretation solutions in laws.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55934,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Legal Discourse\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"181 - 196\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Legal Discourse\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2019-2022\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Legal Discourse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2019-2022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

法院解释包含了信息从一种源文化向目的文化的传递,而从模因论的角度来看,信息的传递导致了法律话语中一个共同的、有意义的框架的概念化,特别是在翻译、口译和交流领域。这种考虑为法院解释提供了理论假设,即法院解释是一种超越意义复制的意义建构的双语实践,因为意义单位可以被视为自我复制的复杂概念。由于法院口译的目的是寻找对等,而法院口译员的功能是公平的,因此符号对等可以为口译员提供一个更有用的工具,通过语言符号的帮助,更深入地了解意义的机制及其编码。同时,法庭口译员作为语言和文化的调解人,在他们的社区中传达正确的话语和/或言语行为的内容。积极和协作的工作是必要的,以便在文化挑战的实际约束下进行调解、决定和分析,以制定可行的法律解释解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A memetic exploration of court interpretation
Abstract Court interpretation subsumes transferring information from one source culture to the target culture, and the transfer of information, from the perspective of memetics, leads to the conceptualization of a common and significant framework in legal discourse, especially in the translation, interpretation and communication fields. This consideration gives the theoretical assumption for court interpretation, that is, court interpretation is a bilingual practice of meaning construction beyond meaning replication, because meaning units could be viewed as self-replicating complex ideas. Since the purpose of court interpretation is to find equivalence and the functions of court interpreters are being fair, semiotic equivalence can provide an even more useful tool for interpreters by offering greater insight into the mechanism of meaning and its encoding with the help of linguistic symbols. Meanwhile, court interpreters act as language and culture mediators to convey the correct contents of utterances and/or speech acts among their communities. Active and collaborative works are then necessary to mediate, decide, and analyze under real constraints with cultural challenges to elaborate viable interpretation solutions in laws.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
80.00%
发文量
10
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信