Minimalist Perspective on Legal Communication: A Case Study of English to Urdu Translation of Punjab Laws

Naumana Kanwal, Muhammad Javed Iqbal, Mariam Mushtaq

Abstract


Syntactic choices and complexity reduction make translation communicative for the readers. This paper underscores the syntactic choices as well as complexity reduction in Urdu translation of Punjab laws in English. The study focuses on legal communication in a minimalistic perspective. It draws upon the theory of minimalism proposed by Chomsky (1993), along with the three-stage model by Nida and Taber (1969). Data is analyzed by employing Burton’s (2021) clausal analysis. The legal data used for the research comprises Punjab laws in English and their Urdu translation. The findings reveal minimalism as a useful strategy in the translation process for reducing structure complexity and making the translation understandable to laypeople. The study is beneficial to English-Urdu translators since it instructs them on how to make their translations communicative, especially when dealing with legal texts. It is also useful for academics in the field of Translation Studies who are working on minimalist views.

Keywords: minimalism, complexity reduction, legal translation, syntactic choices, communication 


Full Text:

PDF

References


Ali, A., Jabbar, Q., & Kiani, H. (2021). Clausal-Internal Scrambling in Urdu Language: A Derivation by Phases. REiLA: Journal of Research and Innovation in Language, 3(1), 52-60.

Anjomshoa, L., & Sadighi, F. (2015). Minimalism, economy, simplicity, and children language acquisition. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 142-149.

Burton-Roberts, N. (2021). Analysing sentences: An introduction to English syntax. Routledge.

Chomsky, N. (1993). A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory. Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press.

Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Clark, B. (2020). The Evolvability of Words: On the Nature of Lexical Items in Minimalism. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 3071.

Collins, C. (2001). Economy conditions in syntax. The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory, 45-61.

Collyer, J. (1735). The General Principles of Grammar; Especially Adapted to the English Tongue. With a Method of Parsing and Examination, Etc. Tho. Collyer.

Dictionary, O. E. (1989). Oxford English dictionary. Simpson, JA & Weiner, ESC.

Fong, S. (2008). Parsing in the minimalist program: On SOV languages and relativization. The Canadian Journal of Linguistics/La revue canadienne de linguistique, 53(2), 237-252.

Gallego, A. J., & Andreu, J. F. (2009). The Minimalist Program and the concept of Universal Grammar/The Minimalist Program and the concept of Universal Grammar/The Minimalist Program and the concept of Universal Grammar. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 8, 7-15.

He, A. W., & Xiao, Y. (Eds.). (2008). Chinese as a heritage language: Fostering rooted world citizenry (Vol. 2). Natl Foreign Lg Resource Ctr.

Iamartino, G., Bignami, M., & Pagetti, C. (2002). The economy principle in English: linguistic, literary, and cultural perspectives. Proceedings of the XIX Conference of the Associazione Italiana di Anglistica. Edizioni Unicopli.

Jackendoff, R. (2005). Alternative minimalist visions of language. In Proceedings from the Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago Linguistic Society, 189-226.

Jespersen, O. (1949). A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles: Syntax, completed and edited by Niels Haislund . G. Allen & Unwin.

Kobayashi, H. (2015). The Principle of Linguistic Economy and Emphasis in English. University of Hyogo. 50-61.

Liang, L., & Xu, M. (2016). Libo Huang. Style in Translation: A Corpus-Based Perspective. Babel, 62(1), 165-168.

Lowth R. (1762). A Short Introduction to English Grammar. London.

Mobbs, I. J. (2015). Minimalism and the Design of the Language Faculty (Doctoral dissertation, University of Cambridge).

Murphy, E. (2020). Language design and communicative competence: The minimalist perspective. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics, 5(1).

Nida, E. (1964). Towards a Science of Translating. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

Nida, E. A., & Taber, C. R. (Eds.). (1982). The theory and practice of translation. Brill Archive.

Radford, A. (Ed.). (2007). Martin Atkinson: The Minimalist Muse. Department of Language & Linguistics, University of Essex.

Sadiq, S. (2008). Translation: Some Lexical and Syntactic Problems & Suggested Solutions. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Samadi, L., Sayyar, S., & Sadighi, F. (2015). Uniformity, Economy, and Simplicity in Minimalism. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 2, 249-257.

Shuttleworth, M. (2004). &Moira Cowie. Dictionary of Translation Studies.

VanEenoo, C. (2011). Minimalism in Art and Design: Concept, influences, implications and perspectives. Journal of Fine and Studio Art, 2(1), 7-12.

Vicentini, A. (2003). The economy principle in language. Notes and Observations from early modern English grammars. Mots, Palabras, Words, 3, 37-57.

Wit, E. C., & Gillette, M. (1999). What is linguistic redundancy? University of Chicago.

Xiao, H. (2008). On the Applicability of Zipf's Law in Chinese Word Frequency Distribution. J. Chin. Lang. Comput., 18(1), 33-46.

Zipf, G. K. (1949). Human Behaviour and the Principle of Least Effort. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley Press.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.18326/rgt.v15i1.64-90

Refbacks



Bookmark and Share


Copyright (c) 2022 Naumana Kanwal, Muhammad Javed Iqbal, Mariam Mushtaq

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

In the aim of improving the quality of the Journal since 19th October 2016 this journal officially had made cooperation with ELITE Association Indonesia (The association of Teachers of English Linguistics, Literature & Education). See The MoU Manuscript.