424_2061_A.B.

example, the following nominal sentences expressingjurisprudential maxims must rendered into verbalcounterparts in English:Matters are judged by intentions.Yield is guaranteed..The beast’s injury is squander.In contracts, intentions and meanings, not words andstructures,shall be taken into consideration.5.1.1. Collocational/Idiomatic Equivalence5..1.1.1. Collocational EquivalenceCollocation refers to a sequence of co-occurring words orsimply as, Firth puts it, “the company words keep together”,in a combination in which a word tends to occur in relativelypredictable ways with other words, often with restrictions onthe manner of their co-occurrence, as explicitly seen inrestricting certain verbs or adjectives to certain nouns orcertain prepositions. Collocational restrictions are describedby Baker (1992: 285) as ‘semantically arbitrary’ becausethey do not logically follow from the propositional meaningthe word outside the collocational combination. It is thecollocates, Larson (1984: 155) contends, that determinewhich sense is indicated in a given phrase. Larson (ibid) citesthe example of the word ‘dress’ which has two drasticallydifferent meanings in the phrase ‘dress the chicken’ and70