scholarly journals How do translators handle (near-) synonymous legal terms? A mixed-genre parallel corpus study into the variation of EU English-Polish competition law terminology

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 69-90
Author(s):  
Łucja Biel ◽  
Dariusz Koźbiał
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Semantic Field ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Corpus Study ◽  
Parallel Corpus ◽  
Source Language ◽  
Conceptual Clarity ◽  
Mixed Genre

Terminological variation, i.e. synonymy at the term level, is regarded as a recurrent problem in EU law. Working with a parallel-comparable corpus of EU English-Polish legislation, soft law and judgments in the area of competition, this study explores how source-language synonymy is handled in translation across institutional genres. The findings show that synonyms may be reflected symmetrically or asymmetrically, with variation being eliminated, partly reduced, mirrored, or increased in translation. It is quite frequent for translators to introduce additional variation and cross-variation. This is affected by: genre, source and target asymmetries, complexity of a semantic field, low termness and microdiachronic shifts. The study confirms that synonymy is one of the causes of variation in translation and calls for more conceptual clarity at the drafting stage.

A refusal to grant access to a grid within the provision of crude oil transfer services as an example of a prohibited abuse of a dominant position in the EU and Polish competition law

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wojciech Paweł SZYDŁO
Keyword(s):  
Crude Oil ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Oil Companies ◽  
Effective Competition ◽  
Oil Pipelines ◽  
Transfer Services ◽  
The Eu

Aim: The paper discusses cases in which a refusal by an energy enterprise to connect other enterprises to the network is treated as a prohibited abuse of the enterprise's dominant position and, equally, will represent behavior prohibited by art. 12 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and by art. 9 par. 2 item 2 of the Competition and Consumer Protection Law as well as legal consequences of such refusal. It is important to pinpoint such cases since the EU sectoral regulation does not provide for obligating any undertakings which manage and operate oil pipelines to enter into contracts with other undertakings such as contracts on connecting into their network or contracts on providing crude oil transfer services. Conditions for accessing oil pipelines and selling their transfer capacities are determined by the owners of the networks: private oil companies in the countries across which the pipelines are routed. These conditions are not governed by the EU law.  Furthermore, the very obligation of connecting other entities to own network by energy undertakings operating in the oil transfer sector in Poland will only arise from generally applicable provisions of the Polish competition law.  Design / Research methods: The purpose of the paper has been reached by conducting a doctrinal analysis of relevant provisions of Polish and EU law and an analysis of guidelines issued by the EU governing bodies. Furthermore, the research included the functional analysis method which analyses how law works in practice. Conclusions / findings: The deliberations show that a refusal to access the network will be a manifestation of a prohibited abuse of a dominant position and will be a prohibited action always when the dominant's action is harmful in terms of the allocation effectiveness. It will be particularly harmful when delivery of goods or services objectively required for effective competition on a lower level market, a discriminatory refusal which leads to elimination of an effective competition on the consequent market, a refusal leading to unfair treatment of consumers and an unjustified refusal. Originality / value of the article: The paper discusses the prerequisites which trigger the obligation to connect entities to own network by energy undertakings operating in the oil transfer sector. The obligation has a material impact on the operations of the oil transmitting undertakings, in particular on those who dominate the market. The regulatory bodies in the competition sector may classify a refusal of access to own network by other enterprises as a prohibited abuse of the dominant position, exposing such undertakings to financial consequences.Implications of the research: The research results presented in the paper may be used in decisions issued by the President of the OCCP and in judgement of Polish civil courts and EU courts. This may cause a significant change in the approach to classifying prohibited practices to prohibited behavior which represent abuse of the dominant position. The deliberations may also prompt the Polish and EU legislator to continue works on the legislation.

scholarly journals Pro-drop in interrogatives and declaratives.

2019 ◽  
Vol 100 (7) ◽  
pp. 95-140
Author(s):  
Federica Cognola ◽  
George Walkden
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Old High German ◽  
Null Subjects ◽  
Corpus Study ◽  
Substantial Body ◽  
Parallel Corpus ◽  
Subordinate Clauses ◽  
The Asymmetry

While there has been a substantial body of research on the asymmetry between main and subordinate clauses in terms of the licensing of pro-drop, potential differences between types of unembedded clause have received much less attention – despite the fact that competing theories of pro-drop make strong, clear predictions about the distribution of null subjects across clause types, especially with regard to interrogatives. This paper presents the first in-depth comparative study of pro-drop in both declaratives and interrogatives in two asymmetric pro-drop languages: Old High German and Old Italian. Based on a parallel corpus study using two translations of Tatian’s Diatessaron, we show that there is a clear difference in distribution between interrogatives and declaratives: null subjects are more frequent in declarative clauses than in interrogatives, and these also differ in terms of the persons in which pro-drop is licensed. Our results speak against the V-in-C licensing theory of asymmetric pro-drop of Benincà (1984) and Adams (1987), and in favour of an account based on an Agree relation with left-peripheral operators in the sense of Frascarelli (2007, 2018).

scholarly journals Arabic-English Parallel Corpus: A New Resource for Translation Training and Language Teaching

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arab World English Journal ◽  
Hind M. Alotaibi
Keyword(s):  
Language Teaching ◽  
Data Driven ◽  
Text Segmentation ◽  
Web Interface ◽  
King Saud University ◽  
Parallel Corpora ◽  
Parallel Corpus ◽  
Source Language ◽  
User Friendly ◽  
Ongoing Project

Parallel corpora can be defined as collections of aligned, translated texts of two or more languages. They play a major role in translation and contrastive studies, and are also becoming popular in translation training and language teaching, with the advent of the data-driven learning (DDL) approach. Despite their significance, however, Arabic seems to lack a satisfactory general-use parallel corpus resource. The literature describes few Arabic–English parallel corpora, and these few are usually inaccurate and/or expensive. Some are small in size, while others are restricted in terms of genre, failing to meet the requirements of many academics and researchers. This paper describes an ongoing project at the College of Languages and Translation, King Saud University, to compile a 10-million-word Arabic–English parallel corpus to be used as a resource for translation training and language teaching. The bidirectional corpus can be used to compare translated and source language and identify differences. The corpus has been manually verified at different stages, including translation, text segmentation, alignment, and file preparation; it is available as full-text in XML format and through a user-friendly web interface that provides a concordancer to support bilingual search queries and several filtering options.

Part I Introduction, 1 Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wijckmans Frank ◽  
Tuytschaever Filip
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Public And Private Enforcement ◽  
The Eu

This chapter explains the term ‘vertical agreements’ and what it covers. It addresses a number of general issues that are relevant to the EU competition law treatment of vertical agreements in general. It describes the implementation and the (public and private) enforcement of Article 101 TFEU before and after the entry into force of Regulation 1/2003. The chapter provides the historical background of both Regulation 330/2010 and Regulation 461/2010. In particular, it devotes specific attention to the nature and legal and practical consequences of soft EU competition law (in the form of notices, guidelines, etc) as opposed to hard EU competition law (provisions of primary and secondary EU law).

Part I EU Competition Law Private Enforcement and the Antitrust Damages Directive, 2 Promotion and Harmonization of Antitrust Damages Claims by Directive 2014/104/EU?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodger Barry ◽  
Ferro Miguel Sousa ◽  
Marcos Francisco
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Member States ◽  
Competition Law Enforcement ◽  
Eu Competition Law

This chapter explains the contents and goals of the Antitrust Damages Directive (Directive 2014/104/EU), the corollary of the EU’s policy towards the promotion and facilitation of private enforcement of competition law. It first traces the evolution in EU competition law enforcement and policy that led to the adoption of the Directive before considering the goals of the Directive in more detail, namely to provide rules for the effective compensation of victims of antitrust infringements and to harmonize some rules concerning damages claims. It then examines the Directive’s legal basis under EU Law as well as substantive provisions, including those relating to compensatory principles, quantification of harm, and consensual dispute resolution. The chapter goes on to highlight neglected issues, limitations, and inherent biases regarding the scope and nature of the Directive’s rules and concludes with an analysis of issues arising from implementation of the Directive in Member States.

3. The relationship between European Union and United Kingdom competition law

2019 ◽  
pp. 57-75
Author(s):  
Sandra Marco Colino
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Current Interaction ◽  
Article 50 ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

This chapter focuses on the current interaction between European Union and UK law. EU law is currently a source of UK law. However, the relationship between the two regimes is expected to change in the future as a consequence of the UK’s decision to withdraw from the EU. The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 stipulates that the European Communities Act 1972 will be ‘repealed on exit day’, which would be 29 March 2019 provided that the two-year period since Article 50 TEU was triggered is not extended. Once the European Communities Act 1972 has been repealed, EU law will cease to be a source of UK law. No major immediate changes to the national competition legislation are to be expected, but future reforms could distance the UK system from the EU rules.

4. EU legislative powers

2020 ◽  
pp. 88-122
Author(s):  
Sylvia de Mars
Keyword(s):  
Transition Period ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Legislative Processes ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the sources of EU law. As with domestic law, there are two overarching categories of EU law: primary law and secondary law. EU primary law includes the EU Treaties and the general principles of EU law. Meanwhile, EU secondary law includes regulations, directives, decisions, international agreements, and ‘soft law’. The chapter then looks at the legislative processes that are used to adopt secondary legislation, and assesses when, or in what policy areas, the EU can make law. It also considers two mechanisms that aim to prevent the EU from extending its legislative power beyond what the Treaties have granted it: the principle of subsidiarity and the principle of proportionality. Finally, the chapter addresses the impact of Brexit on EU law, assessing what will happen to EU law in the UK during the Withdrawal Agreement's transition period.

Individual Sanctions of Competition Law: A Comparison between the UK and Turkey

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 154-171
Author(s):  
Samet Caliskan ◽  
Saliha Oner
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Deterrent Effect ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
High Expectations ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Way

It is a highly advocated view that a competition law with sanctions targeting individuals would achieve a greater deterrent impact than one that does not. Having introduced individual sanctions does not, however, guarantee that a market would have less anticompetitive conduct, because these sanctions are effective only insofar as they are severely implemented on wrongdoing individuals. UK competition law is one example of this issue because cases where individuals have been targeted and punished are significantly fewer than the authorities expected, in spite of it being more than 15 years since individual sanctions were introduced amidst high expectations. This article examines the individual sanctions of competition law in the UK and Turkey. It argues that Turkey is on the right path by departing from the way in which EU law enforces the rules of competition law, and is moving closer to UK law. However, it is argued that further steps should be cautiously considered to avoid the same issues which UK competition law is currently experiencing, as there are serious doubts that the latter has achieved the desired deterrent effect.

4. EU Law: Sources, Forms, and Law-Making

2021 ◽  
pp. 94-140
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Alternative Decision ◽  
Law Making ◽  
The Eu

This chapter takes an overall view of the EU legal order and examines its legal system, including the elements which are either different from or similar to member states’ legal systems. It begins by taking an overall view of the EU legal order, the different forms of EU law, and the various sources of law contributing to this legal order, in particular now the rich source of human and fundamental rights in the EU legal order. It considers the non-strictly legally binding rules known as ‘soft law’. It also looks at the ways or processes by which the binding laws are made and reviews alternative decision-making and law-making developments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document