UniversitÃ© de MontrÃ©al - ThÃ¨se sous forme numÃ©rique

More documents

Recommendations

Info

316Faber, P., P. León Arauz and J.A. Prieto Velasco (2009). ―Semantic Relations, Dynamicity,and Terminological Knowledge Bases.‖ Current Issues in Language Studies 1: 1-23.Felber, H. (1987). Manuel de terminologie. Paris: UNESCO.Felber, H. and G. Budin (1989). Terminologie in Theorie und Praxis. Forum fürFachsprachenforschung. Tübingen: Günter Narr Verlag.Fillmore, C. (1968). ―The Case for Case.‖ In E. Bach and R. Harms (eds.) Universals inLinguistic Theory. 1-88. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Fillmore, C. (1976). ―Frame semantics and the nature of language.‖ Annals of the NewYork Academy of Sciences: Conference on the Origin and Development ofLanguage and Speech. 280 (1976): 20-32.Fillmore, C. (1977). ―Scenes-and-Frames Semantics, Linguistic Structures Processing.‖ InA. Zampolli (ed.) Fundamental Studies in Computer Science, No. 59, 55-88. NorthHolland Publishing.Fillmore, C. (1982). ―Frame Semantics.‖ In Linguistics in the Morning Calm. 111-137.Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Co..Fillmore, C. (1985). ―Frames and the Semantics of Understanding.‖ In Quaderni diSemantica 6(2): 222-254.Fillmore, C. and C. Baker (2001). ―Frame Semantics for Text Understanding.‖ InProceedings of WordNet and Other Lexical Resources Workshop, NAACL,Pittsburgh, June 2001.Fillmore, C. and S. Atkins (1992). ―Towards a Frame-based Lexicon: The semantics ofRISK and its Neighbors.‖ In A. Lehrer and E. Kittay (eds.) Frames, Fields, andContrast: New Essays in Semantics and Lexical Organization. 75-102. Hillsdale:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Fillmore, C. and S. Atkins (1998). ―FrameNet and Lexicographic Relevance.‖ InProceedings of the First International Conference on Language Resources andEvaluation, Granada, Spain, 28-30 May 1998.Fillmore, C., C. Johnson and M. Petruck (2003a). ―Background to FrameNet.‖International Journal of Lexicography 16(3): 235-250.Fillmore, C., M. Petruck, J. Ruppenhofer and A. Wright (2003b). ―FrameNet in Action:The Case of Attaching.‖ International Journal of Lexicography 16(3): 297-332.
317Fontenelle, T. (2000). ―A Bilingual Lexical Database for Frame Semantics.‖ InternationalJournal of Lexicography 13(4): 232-248.Fowler, A. (1982). Kinds of Literature. An Introduction to the Theory of Genres andModes. Cambridge, Massachussets: Harvard University Press.Frawley, W. (1992). Linguistic Semantics. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Freixa, J. and M. Lorente (2006). ―La sinonímia en unitats verbals del discurs jurídic.‖Papers Lextra (Revista electrònica del grup d'estudis de Dret i Traducció).http://www.lextra.uji.es/papers/2006/Freixa_Lorente06.pdf. Last consulted 27February 2012.Fuzer, C. and N. Barros (2009). ―Accusation and Defense: The Ideational Metafunction ofLanguage in the Genre Closing Argument.‖ In C. Bazerman, A. Bonini and D.Figueiredo (eds.) Genre in a Changing World. Perspectives on Writing. 78-96. FortCollins, Colorado: The WAC Clearinghouse and Parlor Press.Gall, G. (2004). The Canadian Legal System. Toronto: Carswell.Gamonal, M. (2011). ―Copa 2014 Framenet Brasil: análise da unidade lexical ―visitar‖ doframe de turismo.‖ Anais do SILEL 2(2): 1-17.http://www.ileel.ufu.br/anaisdosilel/pt/arquivos/silel2011/2609.pdf. Last consulted27 February 2012.García de Quesada, M. and A. Reimerink (2010). ―Frames, conceptual information andimages in terminology: A proposal.‖ In M. Thelen and F. Steurs (eds.) Terminologyin Everyday Life. 97-121. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Garzone, G. (2000). ―Legal Translation and Functionalist Approaches: a Contradiction inTerms?‖ In ASTTI/ETI: 395-414. http://www.tradulex.org/Actes2000/Garzone.pdf.Last consulted 27 February 2012.Gaudin, F. (2003). Socioterminologie : Une approche sociolinguistique de la terminologie.Bruxelles: Duculot.Gawron, J. (2008). ―Frame Semantics.‖ Unpublished document, San Diego StateUniversity.Gémar, J.-C. (1991). ―Terminologie, langue et discours juridiques. Sens et signification dulangage du droit.‖ Meta 36(1): 275-283.Gémar, J-C. (2002). ―Traduire le texte pragmatique. Texte juridique, culture et traduction.‖In E. Lavault-Olléon (ed.) Le facteur culturel dans la traduction des textespragmatiques, Les Cahiers de l‟ILCEA 3 (2001-2002). 11-38. Université Stendhal-Grenoble.
Page 3 and 4:
Université de MontréalFaculté de
Page 5 and 6:
iiiframework to the compilation of
Page 7 and 8:
vd‘autres contributions ayant dé
Page 9 and 10:
vii2.3.1. The theory of classes of
Page 12 and 13:
x5.3.1. Full equivalents ..........
Page 14:
xiiTable 23. The frame [Proof] grou
Page 19 and 20:
xviiTypographical conventionsTerms:
Page 21 and 22:
xixTo my parents, Fátima and João
Page 23 and 24:
1. IntroductionThis research studie
Page 25 and 26:
3translator can understand the mean
Page 27 and 28:
5theoretical frameworks that have b
Page 29 and 30:
2. The state of the artIn order to
Page 31 and 32:
9terminology of Canadian and Portug
Page 33 and 34:
11Translation:Legal discourse is in
Page 35 and 36:
13possible? The question of transla
Page 37 and 38:
152.1.2. GenresAccording to Gémar
Page 39 and 40:
17Genre studies are consensual in d
Page 41 and 42:
19Figure 1. Typology of legal texts
Page 43 and 44:
21the two typologies. For example,
Page 45 and 46:
23In Canada as in Portugal, dispute
Page 47 and 48:
25judgments. He argues that knowled
Page 49 and 50:
27Maingueneau (2004) for whom build
Page 51 and 52:
29find equivalents in a systematic
Page 53 and 54:
31(2005) and most recently in Adams
Page 55 and 56:
33the langue-related concept of equ
Page 57 and 58:
352.2.1.2. Concepts and designation
Page 59 and 60:
37in Hartmann and James (1998: 51)
Page 61 and 62:
392.2.1.4. Semantic content and col
Page 63 and 64:
41―Vocabulary type‖ refers to r
Page 65 and 66:
43A concept can only be understood
Page 67 and 68:
45assistance to identify and valida
Page 69 and 70:
47(intertextual). Cop (1991: 2776)
Page 71 and 72:
49Functional equivalenceZgusta (198
Page 73 and 74:
51particular purpose in mind: ―Ä
Page 75 and 76:
53Table 2. Anisomorphism: example o
Page 77 and 78:
55in such a way that they are compo
Page 79 and 80:
572.2.3. Qualitative and quantitati
Page 81 and 82:
59be cases of full equivalence with
Page 83 and 84:
Graphicalrepresentation of therelat
Page 85 and 86:
63For instance, in Figure 10 saudad
Page 87 and 88:
65Another example of insufficient c
Page 89 and 90:
67appears and then skims texts in t
Page 91 and 92:
69equivalents but she also maintain
Page 93 and 94:
71defined by taking into account th
Page 95 and 96:
73Among these studies, some contrib
Page 97 and 98:
75other words or sequences of words
Page 99 and 100:
77The third type of verbs, i.e. pol
Page 101 and 102:
79author applied to the selection o
Page 103 and 104:
81represent synonymy, antonymy, nom
Page 105 and 106:
83contexts, but also a hyperlink ca
Page 107 and 108:
85The typology of verbs appearing i
Page 109 and 110:
87Phraseological verbs are predicat
Page 111 and 112:
89temperature rises; the air circul
Page 113 and 114:
91examples, they state that discurs
Page 115 and 116:
93Another problem with this represe
Page 117 and 118:
95connective verbs are simple verbs
Page 119 and 120:
97different. The criteria designed
Page 121 and 122:
99to show the mismatch that occurs
Page 123 and 124:
101content from the perspective of
Page 125 and 126:
103mesma quantia global, de 6151000
Page 127 and 128:
105entities with authority to trans
Page 129 and 130:
107Nevertheless, Pimentel and L‘H
Page 131 and 132:
109In 1995, L‘Homme proposes a me
Page 133 and 134:
111these reasons, we believe it rem
Page 135 and 136:
113But in order to understand Frame
Page 137 and 138:
115Par exemple, les règles de sous
Page 139 and 140:
117the nature of language‖, that
Page 141 and 142:
119This kind of understanding by th
Page 143 and 144:
121Firstly, according to him, seman
Page 145 and 146:
123exchanging the goods for money (
Page 147 and 148:
125As mentioned in the previous sec
Page 149 and 150:
127Quarreling:(3, 9) the participan
Page 151 and 152:
129corresponds to a semantic type w
Page 153 and 154:
131Figure 21. Lexical entry report
Page 155 and 156:
133parent frame. The frame [Quarrel
Page 157 and 158:
1353.2.2.2. Environmental ScienceAn
Page 159 and 160:
137Figure 23. The Coastal Engineeri
Page 161 and 162:
139Spanish terms that are reported
Page 163 and 164:
141the FrameNet methodology will be
Page 165 and 166:
143Agnoloni et al. (2010). Followin
Page 167 and 168:
145scenes: ―Whereas a scene is de
Page 169 and 170:
Table 9. Confirming cross-linguisti
Page 171 and 172:
149Table 10. Summary of the annotat
Page 173 and 174:
151Contrary to the FrameNet approac
Page 175 and 176:
153Also, in an article entitled ―
Page 177 and 178:
155support for the characterization
Page 179 and 180:
157period in which the texts were w
Page 181 and 182:
159for Brazilian Portuguese). The E
Page 183 and 184:
161case. In its written form, an ac
Page 185 and 186:
163Table 14. Beginning of the thema
Page 187 and 188:
165The decisão is the final sectio
Page 189 and 190:
167In order to identify the content
Page 191 and 192:
1694.1.3.3. ExpertsAll authors of t
Page 193 and 194:
171The ―Introduction‖ states th
Page 195 and 196:
173favourable decisions are quite s
Page 197 and 198:
1754.1.4.1. FunctionPortuguese and
Page 199 and 200:
177semble impliquer qu‘ils doiven
Page 201 and 202:
179Figure 24. Bottom-up approach4.3
Page 203 and 204:
181Despite this word of caution, we
Page 205 and 206:
183evokes the last stage of the cri
Page 207 and 208:
185Finally, some candidate terms we
Page 209 and 210:
187Due to the differences in the nu
Page 211 and 212:
189making an oral agreement. In thi
Page 213 and 214:
191is a substantially higher one th
Page 215 and 216:
193concur 1L'Heureux-Dubé J. disse
Page 217 and 218:
195Although the occurrences of the
Page 219 and 220:
197[Constitutionality]infringe 1 ,
Page 221 and 222:
199Table 18. comply 1 , infringe 1
Page 223 and 224:
201have the same number and type of
Page 225 and 226:
203< FE nom="">< FE nom="">vtFigure
Page 227 and 228:
205After hearing his alibi evidence
Page 229 and 230:
207declarar 1Como é sabido, o Trib
Page 231 and 232:
209Sometimes the target term shares
Page 233 and 234:
211FEs that correspond to prepositi
Page 235 and 236:
213the hearing judgeFigure 40. Anno
Page 237 and 238:
215the indication of the reference.
Page 239 and 240:
217the first meaning was related to
Page 241 and 242:
219cumprir 1 ; 2) exceed 1 and viol
Page 243 and 244:
221the semantic nature of the terms
Page 245 and 246:
Portuguese223Agency, authority, BNS
Page 247 and 248:
2255.1.1. Portuguese termsCandidate
Page 249 and 250:
2276. Ambiguity between the past pa
Page 251 and 252:
229a legal genre set out in the fir
Page 253 and 254:
231as Prata (2005) and Prata et al.
Page 255 and 256:
2331. Ambiguity between the past fo
Page 257 and 258:
235(section 5.1.1.2.1); the second
Page 259 and 260:
237corpus, the action of adducing i
Page 261 and 262:
239draw some considerations on the
Page 263 and 264:
241extraction of Portuguese terms b
Page 265 and 266:
243The second half of the frame des
Page 267 and 268:
Portuguese245artigo, lei, lei pream
Page 269 and 270:
247We can observe that both terms e
Page 271 and 272:
249the core FEs correspond to the a
Page 273 and 274:
251resolve 1[1] This Court can reso
Page 275 and 276:
253are not responsible for applying
Page 277 and 278:
255Table 27. Linguistic realization
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
263Table 33 illustrates that the se
Page 287 and 288: 265Tabela 35. Linguistic realizatio
Page 289 and 290: 267LAW and ISSUE. For all these rea
Page 291 and 292: PortugueseEnglsih269Table 36. amend
Page 293 and 294: 271The application of the aforement
Page 295 and 296: 273propugnar 1Por último, na conte
Page 297 and 298: PortugueseEnglish275Table 37. The f
Page 299 and 300: 277The following pairs of verbs are
Page 301 and 302: 279This frame groups together one E
Page 303 and 304: 281The scenario includes two core F
Page 305 and 306: PortugueseEnglish283For instance, a
Page 307 and 308: 285Translation:* Este Tribunal pode
Page 309 and 310: English287Table 42. The [Order] fra
Page 311 and 312: 289considered candidate equivalents
Page 313 and 314: 291Supreme Court judgments not only
Page 315 and 316: 293Figure 45. Alphabetical list of
Page 317 and 318: 295As in DiCoInfo (L‘Homme 2008),
Page 319 and 320: 297the term dismiss 1 the actantial
Page 321 and 322: 299In the annotated contexts (Figur
Page 323 and 324: 301expression in sentences containi
Page 325 and 326: 303Finally, as the task of annotati
Page 327 and 328: 305The study started with the revie
Page 329 and 330: 307As the research specifically aim
Page 331 and 332: 309study: a larger amount of terms;
Page 333 and 334: 311Atkins, S. and M. Rundell (2008)
Page 335 and 336: 313Carreno, I. (2005). Analyse de l
Page 337: 315Devinat, M. (2005). La règle pr
Page 341 and 342: 319Gross, G. and F. Guenthner (2002
Page 343 and 344: 321L‘Homme, M.-C. (2003). ―Capt
Page 345 and 346: 323McEnery, A. and Z. Xiao (2007).
Page 347 and 348: 325Reimerink, A. and P. Faber. (200
Page 349 and 350: 327Searle, J. (1983). Intentionalit
Page 351 and 352: 329Terminologiewissenschaft = Langu
Page 353 and 354: IIDecisão Texto Integral:Acordam n
Page 355 and 356: IVAppendix 2. Indexing terms of the
Page 357 and 358: Appendix 3. A Canadian judgmentVISU
Page 359 and 360: VIIIof stolen property from six to
Page 361 and 362: Appendix 4. Indexing terms of the C
Page 363 and 364: XIIAppendix 6. Partial list of Engl
Page 365 and 366: XIVFrame and definition Core Frame
Page 367 and 368: XVIFrame and definition Core Frame
Page 369 and 370: XVIIIFrame and definition Core Fram
Page 371 and 372: XXFrame and definition Core Frame E
Page 373 and 374: XXIIFrame and definition Core Frame
Page 375 and 376: XXIVFrame and definition Core Frame
Page 377 and 378: XXVIFrame and definition Core Frame
Page 379 and 380: XXVIIIFrame and definition Core Fra
Page 381 and 382: XXXFrame and definition Core Frame
Page 383 and 384: XXXIIFrame and definition Core Fram
Page 385 and 386: XXXIVFrame and definition Core Fram
Page 387 and 388: XXXVIAppendix 8. Partial list of th
Page 389 and 390:
XXXVIIIargue 1 [Argumentation]Charg
Page 391 and 392:
XLdeem 1 [Judging]Irregularity Core
Page 393 and 394:
XLIIManner Non-core impugn 1 [Conte
Page 395 and 396:
XLIVRight Core assert 3 [Right]Text
Page 397 and 398:
Appendix 10. List of common indirec
Page 399 and 400:
Appendix 11. Data validationXLVIIIV
Page 401 and 402:
Appendix 12. Eliminated candidate t
Page 403 and 404:
Appendix 14. List of Portuguese ter
Page 405 and 406:
48. exercer 2 [Disagreement] exerce
Page 407 and 408:
Appendix 15. List of English termsL
Page 409 and 410:
estipular 1 , prescrever 154. grant
Page 411 and 412:
Appendix 16. List of frames groupin
Page 413 and 414:
LXII37. declarar 1 , state 1 [Argum
show all

UniversitÃ© de MontrÃ©al - ThÃ¨se sous forme numÃ©rique

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?