A Report On The English-Chinese Translation Of The Judgement For The Case:Radojka Backo V Kris Akhurst

This essay is a report on the English-Chinese(E-C)translation project of the Judgement for the Case: Radojka Backo v Kris Akhurst.This judgement is decision made by the judge on the civil claim caused by a traffic accident in South Wales,Australia.The source text cites many cases and statutory laws,frequently uses technical terms,and long and complicated sentences.On top of that,the language styles of the court participants are also different.These are the main features of the source text and the difficulties in the translation.As regards these,this translation practice,guided by functional equivalence,conveys firstly the meaning and then,the style of the source text through various translation methods such as following or adjusting the original order,seeking common ground while existing difference,addition,division,conversion etc.During the translation,the following difficulties are solved: 1.the translation of cited cases;2.the translation of section number in cited acts and rules;3.the translation of technical terms;4.the translation of long and complicated sentences;5.the translation of language styles of different court participants.This report demonstrates how the author,while employing different translation methods,deals with different translation difficulties during the translation.The methods employed can provide new implications for other translators in the translation of judgement on traffic accidents in Australia.This thesis can also give domestic legal practitioners reference on how judges in Australia preside over traffic accidents disputes.Moreover,this report has certain significance for the legal research of the cases of China and Australia.However,as the material of the source text is limited,the translation of the section number in cited acts and rules is only applicable to that in the source text and needs further testing and discussing in the original whole acts and rules.In addition,since the speech material of the Plaintiff,the Defendant and the Lawyers is confined to the source text,the features of their mode of speaking styles may not be fully described and require more other material to give support.