İngiliz ve Türk Hukuk Metinlerinin Çevirisindeki Eşdeğerlik Düzeyi
Loading...
Date
2017
Authors
Mengenli, Özge Akın
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Open Access Color
OpenAIRE Downloads
OpenAIRE Views
Abstract
Küreselleşen dünyamızda, insanlar veya devletler arasında çeşitli amaçlar için kurulan uluslararası ilişkiler, hukuk kuralları çerçevesinde yürütülmektedir. Bu ilişkilerin kurulmasında, sağlamlığında ve devamlılığında hukuk çevirisinin önemi, elbette ki yadsınamaz; zira, her devletin kendine özgü hukuk kuralları vardır ve bu ilişkilerin kurulabilmesi için söz konusu hukuk kurallarının farklı dillere çevrilmesi bir zorunluluk haline gelmiştir. Ancak hukuk metinlerinin kültüre özgü hukuk terimlerini ve kavramlarını içermesi ve bunların erek dile doğru bir şekilde aktarılmasının zorluğu, hukuk çevirisinde eşdeğerlik sorununu gündeme getirmiştir. Bu nedenle, hukuk sistemlerindeki farklılıkların kaynağını bilmek, hukuk çevirisinin zorluklarını bilmek ve çeviri sürecinde uygun yöntem ve teknikleri kullanmak hukuk çevirilerinde eşdeğerliği sağlamada büyük önem taşır. Bu tezin hedefi İngiliz ve Türk hukuk metinlerinin çevirisinde eşdeğerlik seviyesini belirlemek ve eşdeğerliği olmayan hukuk terim ve kavramları için farklı çeviri yöntemlerini kullanarak eşdeğerliği sağlamaktır. Mevcut çalışma, Anglosakson hukuku ve Kara Avrupası hukuk sistemlerine dayanan İngiliz ve Türk hukuk sistemlerine ait hukuk metinlerinin çevirisinde hukuk sistemlerinin farklılıklarından dolayı ortaya çıkan sorunlar üzerinde yoğunlaşır. Söz konusu sorunlar en çok hukuk terimlerinin çevirisinde yaşandığı için, bu çalışma, bazı hukuk dalları çerçevesinde eşdeğerliğin olmadığı tespit edilen birtakım hukuk terimleri ve kavramları için çeşitli çeviri yöntemleriyle çözümler ortaya koyar. Bu çalışmada, işlevselciliği savunan çeviri kuramcılarının eşdeğerlikle ilgili görüşlerine yer verilmiştir. Bu nedenle, betimleyici yöntem bu çalışmanın yöntemi olmuştur. İngiliz ve Türk hukuk metinleri ve hukuk terminolojileri karşılaştırmalı olarak incelendiği için, karşılaştırmalı yöntem de bu çalışmada kullanılan bir yöntem olmuştur. Bu çalışma neticesinde, erek dilde eşdeğerliği olmayan bazı hukuk terimlerinin çeşitli çeviri yöntemleriyle erek dile çevrilebileceği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Kelimesi kelimesine çevirinin yanı sıra, işlevsel eşdeğerliğini bulma, açımlama, ödünç alma, yeni sözcük türetme, çevirmen notu ve kaynak dildeki terimi erek metinde aynı hukuk ailesindeki diğer hukuk dillerinden eşdeğerlikleriyle kullanmak gibi bazı çeviri yöntemlerinin eşdeğerlik sıkıntısını çözmede faydalı olabileceği gözlemlenmiştir.
In our globalized world, the international relations for various purposes between the people or the States are conducted within the framework of the legal rules. The importance of legal translation in the establishment of these relations, in their soundness, and in their continuity is undeniable, since every State has her own legal rules and the translation of these rules into different languages has become a necessity in order to establish such relations. However, the fact that the legal texts include culture-specific legal terms and concepts, and the difficulty of transferring these into the target language correctly has brought up the problem of equivalence. Therefore, knowing the sources of the differences in the legal systems, knowing the difficulties in the legal translation and using the appropriate methods and techniques in the translation process are of capital importance in establishing equivalence in the legal translations. The objective of this thesis is to determine the level of equivalence in the translation of British and Turkish legal texts and to ensure equivalence for the legal terms and concepts with no equivalents by using various translation methods. The present study concentrates on the problems arising from the differences of the legal systems in the translation of the legal texts belonging to the British and the Turkish legal systems, which are based on the Anglo-Saxon Law and the Civil Law. Since these problems arise most frequently in the translation of the legal terms and concepts, this study presents solutions through various translation methods for some legal terms and concepts determined to have no equivalence in some branches of law. In this study, opinions of translation theorists defending functionality are included. For this reason, descriptive method is a method used for this study. Moreover, since the British and Turkish legal texts and their legal terminologies are analyzed comparatively, the contrastive method is also used in this study. In consequence of this study, it is concluded that some legal terms and concepts which have no equivalence in the target language can be translated into the target language through various translation methods. Besides word-for-word translation, it is observed that the methods such as finding functional equivalence, paraphrasing, borrowing, neologism, translator's note and using source language term with its equivalents from the other legal languages of the same legal family in the target text could be useful in solving the equivalence problem.
In our globalized world, the international relations for various purposes between the people or the States are conducted within the framework of the legal rules. The importance of legal translation in the establishment of these relations, in their soundness, and in their continuity is undeniable, since every State has her own legal rules and the translation of these rules into different languages has become a necessity in order to establish such relations. However, the fact that the legal texts include culture-specific legal terms and concepts, and the difficulty of transferring these into the target language correctly has brought up the problem of equivalence. Therefore, knowing the sources of the differences in the legal systems, knowing the difficulties in the legal translation and using the appropriate methods and techniques in the translation process are of capital importance in establishing equivalence in the legal translations. The objective of this thesis is to determine the level of equivalence in the translation of British and Turkish legal texts and to ensure equivalence for the legal terms and concepts with no equivalents by using various translation methods. The present study concentrates on the problems arising from the differences of the legal systems in the translation of the legal texts belonging to the British and the Turkish legal systems, which are based on the Anglo-Saxon Law and the Civil Law. Since these problems arise most frequently in the translation of the legal terms and concepts, this study presents solutions through various translation methods for some legal terms and concepts determined to have no equivalence in some branches of law. In this study, opinions of translation theorists defending functionality are included. For this reason, descriptive method is a method used for this study. Moreover, since the British and Turkish legal texts and their legal terminologies are analyzed comparatively, the contrastive method is also used in this study. In consequence of this study, it is concluded that some legal terms and concepts which have no equivalence in the target language can be translated into the target language through various translation methods. Besides word-for-word translation, it is observed that the methods such as finding functional equivalence, paraphrasing, borrowing, neologism, translator's note and using source language term with its equivalents from the other legal languages of the same legal family in the target text could be useful in solving the equivalence problem.
Description
Keywords
Hukuk, Mütercim-Tercümanlık, Anlam eşdeğerlikler, Dilsel eşdeğerlilik, Eşdeğerlik, Law, Hukuk kavramları, Translation and Interpretation, Semantic equivalence, Metin, Linguistic equivalence, Metin dil bilim, Equivalency, Law concepts, Türk hukuku, Text, Text linguistics, Çeviri, Turkish law, Çeviri bilim, Translation, Science of translation, İngiliz hukuku, English law
Turkish CoHE Thesis Center URL
Fields of Science
Citation
WoS Q
Scopus Q
Source
Volume
Issue
Start Page
0
End Page
147