Czu: 81'25:340.6 the Concepts of Legal Psychology Vs
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INTERTEXT 1-2, 2016 _________________________________________________________ ______________________ CZU: 81’25:340.6 THE CONCEPTS OF LEGAL PSYCHOLOGY VS FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY AND THEIR INTERPRETATIVE TRANSLATION Aliona MELENTIEVA Dragoș VICOL Free International University of Moldova (ULIM) The translational process always was influenced by a series of factors that could worsen the quality of the text meaning rendered from one language into another. It implies an interchange act of cultures, habits and values, finding of a common meaning, sense and appropriate usage (equivalent). In the translational process it is vital to make a comparative and evaluative research of the involved languages as well as the common points of the context within two more or less different societies. In this perspective, the given article focuses on the analysis of the difference between two concepts which pretend to be synonyms – legal and forensic. In the Romanian language there is only one “equivalent” for both concepts which could take different forms as juridic, judiciar. We consider that forensic psychology and legal psychology are different domains, and it is important to underline the conceptual difference between them in order to avoid confuse situations in future when operating with these terms. In this context we considered the interpretative theory of translation in order to understand better the cases of usage of the terms “legal”, “forensic”, “legal psychology” and “forensic psychology”. Keywords: interpretative translation, cognitive knowledge, legal psychology, forensic psychology. It is a well-known fact that the translational process is very complex which always requires a peculiar approach taking into consideration many different aspects such as context, type of text, cultural background, terminological field, etc. of the target language. It is also important to analyze/investigate the “(co) relation” of the source language and target language according to the mentioned aspects, their tangential points in order to make an accurate translation. Generally, some specialists consider that the term translation could be perceived differently: translation as an “abstract concept” (translation is a process and product at the same time); translation as a “product” (the translated text); translation as a process (the translator’s activity); and translation as “interpretation” (text analysis through the linguistic, psycholinguistic, semantic, pragmatic, cultural and communicational perspectives) (Han 143). Although translation is considered mainly a linguistic activity, many authors state that it is referred also to semiotics – science which studies the systems of signs and functions and involves the meaning transfer from one language into another requiring strong knowledge of vocabulary, grammar and a variety of extra-linguistic criteria. In this sense Roman Jakobson distinguishes the following types of translation: intralingual translation or rewording; interlingual translation or translation proper; intersemiotic translation or transmutation. 248________________________________________________________________ TRADUCEREA CA DIALOG INTERCULTURAL ________________________________________________________________________________ He emphasizes the issue that there is no absolute equivalence in the translational process (http://www.uniroma2.it/didattica/ling_ing1_linfo/deposito/ Basnett_slides.doc). The major factor of the given problem is the differences that come from the uniqueness of every society with its own reality, language, culture, administrative and social systems, etc. Thus we can say that the translator is a mediator between two situations of intercultural communication (Han 145). In other words the translator should render the meaning of the source text, to maintain the initial objective of the original expression and informative context (at the qualitative and quantitative levels) and to harmonize the extra-linguistic and socio- cultural contexts of the source and target recipients (http://www.litere.uvt.ro/litere- old/vechi/documente_pdf/aticole/uniterm/uniterm1_2004/glungu.pdf). Consequently the translator’s final purpose in the translational process is not the equivalence of utterances in both languages but their meaning in both contexts. This point of view was largely developed by the specialists of the Academy of Translation and Interpretation of Paris, also called Paris School which issued the interpretative approach or “theory of sense” beginning with D. Seleskovitch, M. Lederer, F. Herbulo, etc. They state that the translation in its deep sense is an interpretation which implies the interpretation of the source text by language symbols and cognitive knowledge of the translator (Kang 236). And we consider namely that the cognitive knowledge plays an important role dealing with some confusing peculiarities in the translational process where two languages are involved, because “language” represents the sound wave of the society with all its components, it is a kind of “physical form” of this society which could get any place on the Earth. Thus the translator’s mission is to create steady bridges between different societies from different parts of the world. That is why the translators should have all “instruments” to build these bridges. In this context we would like to prove that the translator should be very attentive in his/her activity of translating, connecting and matching two languages taking into consideration the above mentioned aspects. The concepts of legal psychology and forensic psychology sometimes create ambiguous situations when they are used by a non-native speaker of English. As for example they are both suitable for the Romanian “psihologie juridică” or the Russian term “юридическая психология”. Analyzing simultaneously the given terminology in English, Romanian and Russian we concluded it would be useful to delimit the differences (if they are) between the concepts of legal psychology and forensic psychology in order to avoid mistakes in their further usage. One of the most popular explanatory dictionaries “Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary” gives the following definitions for “legal” and “forensic”: Legal: adjective 1. [attributive] Relating to the law, connected to the law: the European legal system; 1.1 Appointed or required by the law: a legal requirement; 1.2 Law recognized by common or statute law, as distinct from equity. 2. Permitted by law: he claimed that it had all been legal (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/legal; Wehmeier 734). Forensic: adjective 1. Relating to or denoting the application of scientific methods and techniques to the investigation of crime: forensic evidence, forensic medicine, forensic science; 2. Connected with or used in a court of law. Ex.: forensic psychiatrist – one who examines people who have been accused of a crime. ________________________________________________________________249 INTERTEXT 1-2, 2016 _________________________________________________________ ______________________ noun 1. Scientific tests or techniques used in connection with the detection of crime (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/forensic; Wehmeier 503).The translation into Romanian of legal is “legal, legitim, oficial, juridic” (Bantaș 223); the meaning of forensic in Romanian according to dictionaries is “juridic, de tribunal, judiciar” (Bantaș 154). In Russian: legal – юридический, законный, дозволеный законом, легальный (Müller 481); forensic – судебный (Müller 345). As we have noticed the dictionary meaning of the studied terms in these languages are similar, but their usage is not always the same as it is mentioned above, there are many peculiarities proper to the certain society as court structure, judicial system, law system. That is why we have for forensic medicine – “medicină legală” and “судебная медицина”, for forensic and legal psychology – “psihologie juridică” and “юридическая психология”. Thus in Romanian and Russian there is only just one term for forensic and legal psychology. Legal and Forensic psychologies are relatively new branches of psychology with the law implication which are developing the last 20-30 years. Till now many people are considering them absolute synonyms, but if we look in the depth of their definitions, main features and areas of investigation, we could perceive some important differences. The American Psychological Association (APA) defines forensic psychology as “the application of clinical specialties (investigation, research studies, experimentations, techniques, methods of assessment, treatment, evaluation, etc.) to the legal arena, institutions and people who come into contact with the law” (http://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/psn/2013/09/forensic- psychology.aspx). The APA’s specialists emphasize “the most frequent duty” of the forensic psychologists as being the psychological assessment of individuals who are involved with the legal system (ibidem). A narrow definition of the given term largely used within the related fields is that “forensic psychology deals with the psychological aspects of legal processes including applying theory to criminal investigations, understanding psychological problems associated with criminal behavior, and the treatment of criminals (http://www.bps.org.uk/psychology- public/psychological-terms/psychological-terms). Generally speaking a forensic psychologist represents an expert in a specific field of study, namely psychology / psychiatry and he /she could be appointed by the