quality assurance; legal translation; multilingual law; legal translation competence; legal terminology; international law; international organizations; legal translation decision-making
Prieto Ramos Fernando, Pacho Aljanati Lucie (2018), Comparative Interpretation of Multilingual Law in International Courts: Patterns and Implications for Translation, in Prieto Ramos Fernando (ed.), Bloomsbury, London, New York, 181-201.
Prieto Ramos Fernando (ed.) (2018), Institutional Translation for International Governance: Enhancing Quality in Multilingual Legal Communication
, Bloomsbury, London, New York.
Prieto Ramos Fernando (2018), Institutional Translation: Surveying the Landscape at International Organizations, in Prieto Ramos Fernando (ed.), Bloomsbury, London, New York, 1-8.
Prieto Ramos Fernando, Guzmán Diego (2018), Legal Terminology Consistency and Adequacy as Quality Indicators in Institutional Translation: A Mixed-Method Comparative Study, in Prieto Ramos Fernando (ed.), Bloomsbury, London, New York, 81-101.
Cerutti Giorgina (2017), Evaluating tools for legal translation research needs: The case of fourth-generation concordancers, in Kivilehto Marja, Salmi Leena, Liimatainen Annikki, Nurmi Arja, Wallace Melissa, Viljanmaa Anu (ed.), Frank & Timme, Berlin, 355-389.
Prieto Ramos Fernando (2017), Global Law as Translated Text: Mapping Institutional Legal Translation, in Tilburg Law Review
, 22, 185-214.
Prieto Ramos Fernando (2017), The evolving role of institutional translation service managers in quality assurance: Profiles and challenges, in Biel Łucja, Svoboda Tomáš, Łoboda Krzysztof (ed.), Language Science Press, Berlin, 59-74.
Building on the first integrative model of decision-making and competence development in the interdisciplinary field of Legal Translation Studies, the project will empirically assess levels and perceptions of legal translation quality in international institutional settings, and their relation to legal translation methodological competence, with a view to developing a ground-breaking model of quality assurance that will encompass competence, process and product. A comparative approach will be taken between different organizations, particularly the United Nations, the World Trade Organization and the European Union, and between different language pairs and text-types in legislative, monitoring and judicial procedures. The scope of legal translation and the legal communicative conditions that frame the translation process will first be described before analyzing the degrees of adequacy of translation decisions at microtextual level. Terminological decisions will be used as a characteristic marker of quality and methodological competence in the field, and their levels of adequacy will be correlated to patterns of legal terminology management as reflected in institutional databases. Additional evaluative criteria of semantic accuracy, consistency, style and linguistic correctness will also be applied to a corpus of representative texts that will then be evaluated by selected groups of language professionals and other readers with varying levels of legal thematic and legal translation competences. The comparison of ratings of each variable by profile will elicit the relevance of different kinds and levels of expertise to legal translation quality assessment, as well as the significance of different quality markers and methodological gaps previously identified in the corpus analysis. The resulting model of legal translation quality assurance will support training applications and recommendations for institutional quality enhancement, including recruitment policies, revision procedures and interlinguistic concordance control mechanisms with a potential impact on legal certainty.