Wybory czasowników dyrektywalnych oraz ich wpływ na ekwiwalencję merytoryczną i tekstowo-normatywną w tłumaczeniach wybranych przepisów konstytucyjnych

Abstract

The paper treats of legal (normative) pronouncements and their translations dealing with human rights and freedoms from three different countries. The texts chosen for this purpose were fragments of The Constitution of the Republic of Poland, The Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany and The Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation. The Original texts (in Polish and German respectively) were compared with their translations into German (two translated versions) and Polish (three translated versions of the German text and one translated version of the Swiss text). The evaluation of the translation solutions is preceded by a characterization of constitutional provisions and the grammatical means used to describe rights guaranteed to the recipients of the legal norm in the original texts. The main focus of the analysis was the use of verbs defining the mandated behavior of the norm addressee. The analysis allowed to ascertain that translations often mainly infract the text-normative equivalence beside the substantive equivalence. Such inconsistencies can lead to misinterpretation of the legal effect of the translated provisions. Therefore, translating constitutional texts requires a detailed juxtaposition of the grammatical means typical for similar the target legal system.