Discourse and Textual Level

There are several features contributing to the cohesion and coherence of the documents. Firstly, it is the scarce use of reference. Due to the strict requirements for precision and unambiguity, it is typical of legal document to apply a minimum of personal, objective and possessive pronouns for reference. Instead, repetition is employed, so that no space is left for misinterpretation. However, where it is utterly clear to what person or entity the pronoun refers to, then it is possible to find a relevant pronoun. This particularly holds true for the testament, as well as the Warranty Deed, which is conditioned by the character of the instruments. The aim is to indicate clearly who makes/made those legal decisions, who executed them and what the relationships are between the people concerned in them. To support this, there are some instances from the Testament and the Warranty Deed.

16) I, Janet J. Webster, of …., New York, declare that this is my Last Will and Testament.

17) On this the __ day of _, 2000, before me, the undersigned, a notary public in and for said County and State, personally appeared Mark Lipton, and Joseph Waner, ……, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in ……., and that by his/her/ their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

Besides repetition, other means employed for reference are determiners. In other varieties of English, the definite article “the” is used. In legal English, it is rather rare because legal English employs other devices, such as said and such. These unique determiners stand for “the”, “this”, “the particular”, “the one that is being concerned and no other”, e.g.: such named beneficiary, said pre-deceased beneficiary’s share, such child or children, such expenses, for said County and State, by such player for participating in such game, such injury, by such person and in such manner, to such other provisions and restrictions. In all these examples the word “said” and “such” could be substituted by the article “the” or the demonstrative pronoun “this” with no loss of meaning

The next cohesive device that is necessary to look at is that of conjunctives, (i.e. conjunctions and conjuncts) and other linking devices. In the area of conjunctions, there are two levels of relation between sentences, those of coordination and subordination. In legal documents, at the level of coordination, the typical conjunctions are “and” and “or”, and at the level of subordination they are “if”, “when”, “unless”, “that”, and “which”. In phrases, the coordinating conjunctions “and” and “or” are used. Sometimes the conjunction “but” may appear.

Thus, dealing with textual, system and cultural difficulties, a translator should be aware of the textual differences between English and Ukrainian (i.e. cohesion) and do the appropriate adaptations accordingly. He should bear in mind that such adaptations should not be made on the expense of content. The same principle is true regarding system and cultural differences for which the legal translator acts as a cultural mediator. A number of techniques are likely in translating culture-bound terms (i.e. omission). Knowledge of the system and culture background of the two languages increases the challenge that the translator is encountered with in doing his important task.