Linguistic and Stylistic Features of Legal English in T ranslationAbstractWith the quickening process of globalization of the world economy and after China‟s WTO accession, legal English, as a kind of professional English, is progressing rapidly in our country which is surely having more links with other countries in the world. Undoubtedly, there will be more and more legal documents that need to be translated. Legal English is a particular expressing mode and criterion formed gradually developed through a long process of judicial practice. To do well in the translation of English in law, it is crucial to understand its features. It has vivid features in words diction and sentence structure, and embodies the specialty, sobriety, preciseness and veracity of the legal language .This paper, from the point of linguistics and stylistics, analyses the present situation of legal English, elaborates the features of English in translation of legal documents and summarizes its major stylistic features: accuracy, vagueness and speciality. It reiterates the idea that translation of legal documents requires the grasp of its linguistic features so it also explores those linguistic features in a systematic way .Key words: linguistic featuresstylistic featureslegal Englishtranslation.1.Introduction“Legislative writing has acquired a certain degree of Notoriety rarely equaled by any other variety of English. It has long been criticized for its obscure expressions and circumlocutions，long-winded involved construction and tortuous syntax，meaningless repetitions and archaisms. To the specialist community these are indispensable linguistic devices which bring in precision，clarity，unambiguity and all- inc lusiveness and so on. However，to the non-specialist this is a mere ploy to promote solidarity between the members of the specialist community and to keepnon-specialists at a respectable distance and is hence regarded by them as nothing more than pure linguistic nonsense bringing into professional discourse pomposity, verbosity, flabbiness and circumlocution.”(Bhatia，1994:136)This is a judgement given by Vijay Bhatia about the linguistic features of legislative writings in the first paragraph of his works Cognitive Structuring in Legislative Provisions. It talks about both the specific and unique lexical and syntactic features of the legislative text and also how these linguistic features count from the specialists and non-specialists perspectives. In recent years，there has been a continual process of simplification of the legislative language in the English-speaking countries.However, despite these efforts at simplification and clarification, the gap between legislative text and everyday text is still very wide. Present day legislative text retains its identity as a highly specialized and distinctive text type or genre of English. The legislative texts of the legal systemsof England, Canada, the United States of America, Australia and New Zealand, which are derived from the English common law system, are manifestly similar. (Maley，1994:13) And now, deliberate discussion on the lexical as well as syntactic features of the legislative language will be given in the following part with an aim to guide the translation of this type of legal texts.2.Lexical Features of Legal EnglishArchaic relics，including archaism，French and Latin expressions，are retained in English legislative texts to achieve precision. Also，it is there out of the convention left by the long history of English law. The institution of English law dated from the Norman Conquest. The Normans brought with them legal concepts and procedures，and thus the institution was established. The written language of the law after the Conquest was at first Latin and English. Later，Latin gained ground steadily and became the predominant language in law. And the Latin then in the institution，was not classical or Medieval Latin，but a variety of Latin which included many Latinizied English and Old French words. By the fourteenth century，French became the language of law. And it is not until 1650，by An Act for Turning the Books of the Law，and all processes and proceedings in Courts of Justice into English(455(1650) 11 Acts and Ordinances or the Interregnum) that English became the official language of the law. By that time，Old English(archaism)，Latin，Nomran-French and Middle English terms got fixed in the vocabulary of law. Over the cenutries，there has been a continual process Anglicisation，but in vocabulary，particularly in the specialized，technical lexicon，the law，the effect of its varied origins is still apparent. (Maley，1994:11-13) And now，let‟s see some of the archaisms, words with Latin and French origins, technical terms and official words retained in the legislative texts.ArchaismFrequent use of archaic words is one of the most remarkable featuers of legal language. Archaisms are the set of words used in the period 450-1100 AD，and the period 1100-1500 AD (Li，2003:17) and seldom appear in modern English，especially in the modern oral English. But they do remain in the legislative texts in light of the correctness and conservation of legislative language. Mellinkoff gave some archaisms that he considered to be the“daily bread”for the lawyers and“exposed to most non-lawyers on infrequent occasions”(1963:13): aforesaid and forthwithhere words: hereafter，herein，hereof，heretofore，herewithlet，as in the law tautology，without let or hindrancesaid and such as adjectivesthere words: thereabout, thereafter, thereat, thereby, therefore, therein, thereon, thereto, theretofore, thereupon, therewithwherewords, especially whereas used in recitals, and whereby witness, in the sense of testimony by signature, oath, etc., as in “ In witness whereof, I have set my hand, etc.”witnesseth, meaning to furnish formal evidence of something, the Old English present indicative, third person singular verb form.These words help ensure the accuracy and formalness of the legal texts.Loan wordsWith the expansion of international exchanges and the accelerated trends of globalization，acountry will more or less be influenced by the outside world, so wll the language of the nation. The borrowing of“loan words” is a process in which both form and meaning are borrowed with only a slight adaptation to the phonological system of the new language in some cases. Legal English has used some words that have been borrowed from Latin，French，etc.Words with Latin originLatin first permeated into English in 597 AD，and intermingled by large amount with English in the field of law，in the archaism period of the 14th and 15th AD (Li，2003:17). And since then，lots of English words with Latin sources remain in legal English，some of which are listed in the following table:affirm(断言) veto(否决)appeal(上诉) immune(免除的)offence(犯罪) verdiet(裁决)injury(伤害) litigant(诉讼人)legal(合法的) register(注册)custody(拘留) orbiter(仲裁人)suppress(镇压) testimony(证词)detention(拘留) negotiate(谈判)homicide(杀人) Convict(宣告)declaration(宣言) prosecute(对…起诉)compensate(补偿) appellate(受理上诉的) There are also Latin words retained in the legislative texts. Here is a list of Latin words basic to legislative texts:jus retentiouis(留置权) per stirpes(代位继承)obligatio solidaria(连带债务) confide jussio(共同保证)words with French originSince 1154，Britain had been reined by France in the House of Plantagenet and French became the official language，widely used in palace, courts and schools. Lots of English words with French origins are reserved in the legislative texts today，such as:bill(法案) petition(请愿)suit(诉讼) summon(传票)plea(抗辩) eyre(巡回法庭)inquest(审讯) defendant(被告)assize(巡回审判) attorney(律师)complaint(控告) advocate(辩护者)plaintiff(原告) judge(审判员，法官)bar(法庭，审判台) hue and cry(通缉令)indictment(告发，控告)Technical termsLots of legal technical terms are used in legislative texts out of the requirement for the correctness and clearness of the legal concept. And there are usually two kinds of technical terms in legislative language: the first type is technical terms employed to express the concept ofcommon-core language in daily life; the second type is common-core vocabulary in daily life borrowed to define specific legal meanings in legal language. The former includes words like: tort(侵权) subrogation(代位权)certiorari(上级法院向下级法院或准司法机构调取案卷的令状)，while the latter contains the words like:average(海损) minor(未成年人)omission(不作为) review(复审)limitation(诉讼实效) precedent(判例，先例)affirmance(上级法院维持对下级法院的判决)official wordsColloquial language is seldom used in legislative texts，and aggregation of big words and written language is one of the characteristics of legislative texts.There are many examples to demonstrate this point:Terminated-end purchase-buyRender-make proceed-gorequest-task prior-earlierdesist-stop employ-useamiable-friendly present-givedemonstrate-show commence-beginThe words on the left side of these groups are official words used in legislative texts，while the words on the right side of these groups having exact meanings with the words on the left，but being more colloquial and informal words used more in daily language.Use of synonymsAs the function of legislation is conferring rights and imposing obligations, the use of synonyms helps make the denotation clearer and more precise. Generally speaking，synonyms cannot be replaced by each other in legal English. The difference between“misstatement”and “misrepresentation” is a good illustration of this point. For example，the directors of a company invited a loan from the public and stated that the money would be used to improve the comp any‟s buildings and to extend the business. The real intention of the directors was to use the money to pay off the comp any‟s debts.In this case，is the statement of the directors to the public called “misstatement”or “misrepresentation”? It depends on the fact whether or not the public has made a contract with the company. If so，“mispresentation”should be used. If not，“misstatement”should be used instead.3.Syntactic Features of Legal EnglishBesides lexicon，the syntactic structure of the legislative language is also unique. Unlike syntactic structures in other texts, complex-prepositions, binomial and multinomial expressions, nominalization，a large number and variety of qualifications are used in legislative texts. “The reason for this complexity appears to be that legislative is often trying to cover all possible combinations of conditions and contingencies. Language complexity increases greatly when an attempt is made to unify all these within the confines of a single sentence.”(John，1994:7) These Complicated syntactic features create barriers to effective understanding of legislative texts，yetgreatly to the clear，unambiguous and all-inclusive features of legislative texts. The following are syntactic features of legislative texts.3.1 Use of long complicated sentencesIn order to avoid misunderstandings and disputes，legal drafts sometimes have to arrange a lot of relevant information in different respects into the same sentence，thereby producing a prevalent phenomenon of long complicated sentences in legal texts. It is common to see a passage or an article that contains only one sentence，which asks for the legal translators‟logical and clear understanding of all constituents of the sentence. Sometimes it is up to legal translators to put the long complicated sentences into compound sentences with objective clauses, adverbial clauses or attributive clauses for a well-ogranized and clear statement. Look at the follownig examples:1)Chinese Original V ersion:第二十四条国家基于下列原因之一，可以限制国际服务贸易:(一) 为维护国家安全或者社会公共利益;（二）为保护生态环境;（三）为建立或者加快建立国内特定的服务行业;（四）为保障国家外汇收支平衡;（五）法律、行政法规规定的其他限制。