Cover not available

In:Handbook of Terminology: Volume 3. Legal Terminology
Edited by Łucja Biel and Hendrik J. Kockaert
[Handbook of Terminology 3] 2023
► pp. 16–36

Get fulltext
PDF logo with download linkDownload Chapter PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Chapter EPUB

Frame approach to legal terminology

What may be gained from seeing terminology as manifestation of legal knowledge?

 | Aarhus University
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives (CC BY-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 1 December 2023
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/hot.3.fra2
Abstract
Central in this chapter are affordances of applying a frame approach to the representation of legal knowledge and the relation to legal terminology. The first part introduces the basic idea of linguistic meaning as based on the knowledge held by language users. It is followed by a presentation of frame semantic approaches that have been used for representing legal terminology. The next section discusses conceptual dynamics as an aspect on which frame approaches have special attention. The final section presents a method for constructing a broad basis for conceptual comparisons for lawyers as well as for translators in a frame format as well as an example for how translators may take advantage of such a frame representation.
Article outline
  • Introduction: Meaning as knowledge held by users
  • Frame approaches
    • General aspects of frame approaches in connection with terms
    • Frame approaches to (legal) terminology and terminography
    • Frame approaches for legal terminological resources
    • Frame approaches representing knowledge underlying legal communication
  • How does a frame-oriented conceptualization of legal terms influence the description of terms?
    • Dynamic nature of legal knowledge due to distributed character
    • Non-monolithic character of legal knowledge, subject to contemporary challenge
  • How may a frame approach be practically useful for legal translation?
  • Notes
  • References
References (59)
References
Barsalou, Lawrence W. 1992. “Frames, Concepts, and Conceptual Fields.” In Frames, Fields, and Contrasts. New Essays in Semantic and Lexical Organization, edited by Adrienne Lehrer and Eva Feder Kittay, 21–74. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bartlett, Frederic C. 1932. Remembering. A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brand, Oliver. 2007. “Conceptual Comparisons: Towards a Coherent Methodology of Comparative Legal Studies.” Brooklyn Journal of International Law 32(2):405–466.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Busse, Dietrich. 1997. “Semantisches Wissen und sprachliche Information. Zur Abgrenzung und Typologie von Faktoren des Sprachverstehens.” In Methodologische Aspekte der Semantikforschung, edited by Inge Pohl, 13–34. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Frame-Semantik. Ein Kompendium. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Busse, Dietrich, Michaela Felden, and Detmer Wulf. 2018. Bedeutungs- und Begriffswissen im Recht. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Condamines, Anne and Aurélie Picton. 2022. “Textual Terminology. Origins, principles and new challenges.” In Theoretical Perspectives on Terminology: Explaining terms, concepts and specialized knowledge, edited by Marie-Claude L’Homme and Pamela Faber, 219–236. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, William and D. Alan Cruse. 2004. Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Engberg, Jan. 2009a. “Individual Conceptual Structure and Legal Experts’ Efficient Communication.” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 22(2):223–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009b. “Methodological aspects of the dynamic character of legal terms.” Fachsprache 31(3–4):126–138. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “Knowledge construction and legal discourse: The interdependence of perspective and visibility of characteristics.” Journal of Pragmatics 42(1):48–63. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. “Comparative law for translation: The key to successful mediation between legal systems.” In Legal Translation in Context: Professional Issues and Prospects, edited by Anabel Borja Albi and Fernando Prieto Ramos, 9–25. Bern: Peter Lang. 978-3-0353-0433-6Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. “Conceptualising Corporate Criminal Liability: Legal Linguistics and the Combination of Descriptive Lenses.” In Constructing Legal Discourses and Social Practices: Issues and Perspectives, edited by Girolamo Tessuto, Vijay K. Bhatia, Giuliana Garzone, Rita Salvi and Christopher Williams, 28–56. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. “Comparative Law and Legal Translation as Partners in Knowledge Communication: Frames as a Descriptive Instrument.” In Institutional Translation for International Governance: Enhancing Quality in Multilingual Legal Communication, edited by Fernando Prieto Ramos, 37–48. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2020. “Comparative law for legal translation: Through multiple perspectives to multidimensional knowledge.” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 33(2):263–282. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Engberg, Jan and Dorothee Heller. 2008. “Vagueness and Indeterminacy in Law.” In Legal Discourse across Cultures and Systems, edited by Vijay K. Bhatia, Candlin, Christopher N. and Jan Engberg, 145–168. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Faber, Pamela, ed. 2012. A Cognitive Linguistics View of Terminology and Specialized Language. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. “Frames as a framework for terminology.” In Handbook of Terminology, edited by Henrik J. Kockaert and Frieda Steurs, 14–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Faber, Pamela and Pilar Araúz. 2016. “Specialized Knowledge Representation and the Parameterization of Context.” Frontiers in Psychology 7:1–20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Faber, Pamela and Marie-Claude L’Homme. 2014. “Lexical semantic approaches to terminology. An introduction.” Terminology 20(2):143–150.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Faber, Pamela and Ricardo Mairal. 1999. Constructing a lexicon of English verbs. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Faber, Pamela and Arianne Reimerink. 2019. “Framing terminology in legal translation.” International Journal of Legal Discourse 4(1):15–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1982. “Frame Semantics.” In Linguistics in the Morning Calm, edited by Linguistic Society of Korea, 111–137. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J., Christopher R. Johnson, and Miriam R. L. Petruck. 2003. “Background to FrameNet.” International Journal of Lexicography 16(3):235–250. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gephart, Werner. 2006. Recht als Kultur. Zur kultursoziologischen Analyse des Rechts. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heylen, Kris and Frieda Steurs. 2014. “Translating legal and administrative language: How to deal with legal terms and their flexible meaning potential.” Turjuman 23(2):96–146.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holste, Alexander. 2019. Semiotische Effizienz interfachlicher Sprache-Bild-Textsorten: Schreibprozesse bei Pflichtenheften in technischen Ausschreibungen. Berlin: Frank & Timme. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Janich, Nina and Ekaterina Zakharova. 2014. “Fiktion „gemeinsame Sprache“? Interdisziplinäre Aushandlungsprozesse auf der Inhalts-, der Verfahrens- und der Beziehungsebene.” Zeitschrift für Angewandte Linguistik 61(1):3–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kann, Christoph and Lars Inderelst. 2018. “Gibt es eine einheitliche Frame-Konzeption? Historisch-systematische Perspektiven.” In Frames interdisziplinär: Modelle, Anwendungsfelder, Methoden, edited by Alexander Ziem, Lars Inderelst and Detmer Wulf, 25–68. Düssseldorf: Düsseldorf University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kerremans, Koen, Vanessa Andries, and Rita Temmerman. 2016. “Studying the Dynamics of Understanding and Legal Neologisms within a Linguistically Diverse Judicial Space: The Case of Motherhood in Belgium.” Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 231:46–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kerremans, Koen, Rita Temmerman, and Peter De Baer. 2008. “Construing domain knowledge via terminological understanding.” Linguistica Antverpiensia 7:177–191. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Konerding, Klaus-Peter. 1993. Frames und lexikalisches Bedeutungswissen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
L’Homme, Marie-Claude. 2005. “Sur la notion de ‘terme’.” Meta 50(4):1112–1132. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. “Maintaining the balance between knowledge and the lexicon in terminology: a methodology based on frame semantics.” Lexicography 4(1):3–21. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
L’Homme, Marie-Claude, Benoît Robichaud, and Carlos Subirats. 2014. “Discovering frames in specialized domains.” In Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’14), 1364–1371. Reykjavik: European Language Resources Association.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1986. “An Introduction to Cognitive Grammar.” Cognitive Science 10:1–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McClelland, James L. and David E. Rumelhart. 1985. “Distributed memory and the representation of general and specific information.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 114(2):159–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pelletier, Francis Jeffry. 1994. “The principle of semantic compositionality.” Topoi 13:11–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peruzzo, Katia. 2014. “Term extraction and management based on event templates: An empirical study on an EU corpus.” Terminology 20(2):151–170.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. “Legal system: an additional variable in the analysis of short-term diachronic evolution of legal terminology.” International Journal of Legal Discourse 2(2):291–313. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pimentel, Janine. 2012. “Identifying equivalents of specialized verbs in a bilingual comparable corpus of judgments: A frame-based methodology.” In Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’12), 1791–1798. Istanbul: European Language Resources Association.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. “Using frame semantics to build a bilingual lexical resource on legal terminology.” In Handbook of Terminology, edited by Henrik J. Kockaert and Frieda Steurs, 427–450. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, James. 1995. The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rackevičienė, Sigita, Violeta Janulevičienė, and Liudmila Mockiene. 2019. “Cirmumnavigating non-equivalence in legal languages: A trilingual case study of generic-specific concepts and terms.” The Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes 7(1):1–16. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simonnæs, Ingrid. 2013. “Legal translation and “traditional” comparative law – Similarities and differences.” Linguistica Antverpiensia 12:147–160. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Vol. I: Concept structuring systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. “Approaches to terminology. Now that the dust has settled …” Synaps 20:27–36.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
ten Hacken, Pius. 2015. “Terms and specialized vocabulary.” In Handbook of Terminology, edited by Henrik J. Kockaert and Frieda Steurs, 3–13. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vygotsky, Lev. 1986. Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wagner, Anne, Aleksandra Matulewska, and Le Cheng. 2020. “Law as a culturally constituted sign-system – A space for interpretation.” International Journal of Legal Discourse 5(2):239–267. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zarco-Tejada, Maria Ángeles, and Antonio Lazari. 2017. “Los modelos de semántica de marcos para la representación del conocimiento jurídico en el Derecho Comparado: el caso de la responsabilidad del Estado.” Revista de Llengua i Dret 67:18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zweigert, Konrad and Hein Kötz. 1996. Einführung in die Rechtsvergleichung. 3rd ed. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Beridze, Khatuna & Khatuna Diasamidze
2025. Acquis terminology in English–Georgian translation. Babel. Revue internationale de la traduction / International Journal of Translation / Revista Internacional de Traducción 71:3 ► pp. 279 ff. DOI logo
Fernández‐Silva, Sabela & Juan Antonio Núñez Cortés
2025. Exploring the Effect of Plain Terminology on Processing and Comprehension of Administrative Texts in Spanish: A Self‐Paced Reading Experiment. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 35:2 ► pp. 659 ff. DOI logo
Luo, Weilan & Suqing Yu
2025. Towards autonomy of China’s legal terminology system: a corpus-based analysis of terminological variation in criminal procedure legislation. International Journal of Legal Discourse 10:1 ► pp. 153 ff. DOI logo
Engberg, Jan
2024. Students in the third space: constructions of knowledge of foreign law in legal translations from German into Danish. Comparative Legilinguistics 60 ► pp. 265 ff. DOI logo
Engberg, Jan
2024. Wie man Fach-Kontext beim Übersetzen einbezieht – und was es für ihre Überprüfung braucht. In Translation im Kontext [TRANSÜD. Arbeiten zur Theorie und Praxis des Übersetzens und Dolmetschens, 146], ► pp. 245 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 11 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue