NATIONAL-CULTURAL LACUNAE IN ENGLISH LEGAL DISCOURSE AND THEIR ETYMOLOGICAL BASIS
Keywords:
legal discourse, lacunae, national-cultural lacunae, etymology, legal linguistics, Common Law, English legal terminology, linguoculturology, legal translation, discourse analysis.Abstract
The article investigates national-cultural lacunae in English legal discourse and examines their etymological foundations within the framework of legal linguistics and linguoculturology. Legal discourse represents a complex interaction between language, culture, history, and legal consciousness. Due to the historical evolution of the English legal system, numerous legal terms and concepts emerged that possess no direct equivalents in other linguistic and legal traditions. These culturally specific lexical and conceptual gaps are defined as lacunae. The article analyzes the historical origins, semantic development, and cultural specificity of lacunar legal terminology in English legal discourse. Particular attention is devoted to the etymological sources of English legal vocabulary, including Anglo-Saxon, Norman French, Latin, and ecclesiastical influences. The study identifies the role of historical legal institutions in shaping national-cultural lacunae and explores translation challenges arising in intercultural legal communication. Comparative, etymological, descriptive, and discourse-analytical methods are employed to examine legal terminology from statutes, judicial opinions, and legal dictionaries. The findings demonstrate that legal lacunae are deeply rooted in the historical development of Common Law and reflect national legal mentality, institutional traditions, and sociocultural values. The research contributes to comparative legal linguistics, discourse studies, and translation theory by revealing the interdependence between etymology, culture, and legal semantics in English legal discourse.
References
1. Mellinkoff, D. The Language of the Law. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1963.
2. Tiersma, P. M. Legal Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.
3. Mattila, H. E. S. Comparative Legal Linguistics. London: Routledge, 2013.
4. Cao, D. Translating Law. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 2007.
5. Šarčević, S. New Approach to Legal Translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1997.
6. Crystal, D., Davy, D. Investigating English Style. London: Longman, 1969.
7. Vinay, J. P., Darbelnet, J. Comparative Stylistics of French and English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1995.
8. Vereshchagin, E. M., Kostomarov, V. G. Language and Culture. Moscow: Russian Language Publishers, 1990.
9. Sternin, I. A. Lexical Lacunarity and Intercultural Communication. Voronezh, 2006.
10. Sorokin, Y. A., Markovina, I. Y. “National-Cultural Specificity and Lacunae in Language.” Questions of Linguistics, 1988.
11. Bhatia, V. K. Analyzing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman, 1993.
12. Garner, B. A. Black’s Law Dictionary. St. Paul: Thomson Reuters, 2019.
13. Leith, D. The Language of Politics. London: Routledge, 1987.
14. David, R., Brierley, J. Major Legal Systems in the World Today. London: Stevens & Sons, 1985.
15. Alcaraz, E., Hughes, B. Legal Translation Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing, 2002.
16. Gémar, J.-C. “Legal Translation and the ‘Problem of Equivalence.’” Meta, vol. 24, no. 1, 1979.
17. Catford, J. C. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1965.
18. Sapir, E. Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech. New York: Harcourt Brace, 1921.
19. Whorf, B. L. Language, Thought, and Reality. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1956.
20. Halliday, M. A. K. Language as Social Semiotic. London: Edward Arnold, 1978.
