Université de Montréal - Thèse sous forme numérique

291Supreme Court judgments not only seem to be translatable but, in most cases, there areseveral options of translation.Most importantly, our findings confirm some ideas concerning the phenomenon ofequivalence which are discussed in the literature. As mentioned in Chapter 2 there are twotypologies of equivalence degrees: a qualitative one based on the nature of equivalence anda quantitative one based on the number of equivalents. In this research, we identified fulland partial equivalents (qualitative typology) and we identified equivalence relations ofone-to-one and one-to-many concerning both languages (quantitative typology). Forinstance, we identified one equivalent of vincular 1 (apply 2 ) and we identified twoequivalents for apply 2 (vincular 1 and aplicar 2 ). We also identified partial equivalents byinclusion and partial equivalents by intersection. Apply 2 includes vincular 1 and aplicar 2 forthe reasons mentioned in section 5.3.1.2.1. Amend 1 and suprir 1 are partial equivalents byintersection for the reasons mentioned in section 5.3.1.2.3.Finally, the attested importance of the collocational contexts so as to assess theinterchangeability of the specialized verbs leads us to agree with Wiegand (2002) when heargues that equivalence should be formulated at the textual level. As suggested by Atkinsand Rundell (2008: 473) corpus data can indeed widen our translating horizons.5.4. JuriDiCoThe descriptions of the terms and frames as well as the information on the equivalencestatus of the terms in the two languages were encoded in an xml editor, stored in a serverand published in a webpage called JuriDiCo. This website was designed to be a free onlinebilingual lexical resource based on Frame Semantics as well as on the methodology forelaborating specialized lexical resources developed in the Observatoire de linguistiqueSens-texte (OLST) (L‘Homme 2008). This resource aims to allow users interested in legal