COMPLEX LEXICAL UNITS IN THE LEGALLANGUAGE AND THEIR TRANSLATION FROM

FRENCH INTO MACEDONIAN AND VICE VERSA

Svetlana Jakimovska, PhDUniversity “Goce Delchev”-Stipsvetlana_jakimovska@yahoo.com

AbstractLegal texts are characterized by a high degree ofclarity and precision that the translator isobliged to transfer in the target text. His taskas a translator in this domain is burdened withadditional responsibility as possible languageerrors could have far-reaching consequences inpractice. So, before starting to translate thesource text, he is obliged to consider thechallenges ahead that may be of different nature,terminological, textual etc. This paper willanalyze the complex lexical units, collocationsand phrasemes and their translation from French toMacedonian and vice versa. A special attentionwill be paid to the presentation of these units invarious terminological resources as essentialtools of the translator.

Keywords: legal language, complex lexicalunits, translation, French, Macedonian

IntroductionLaw represents a specific field that affects

us daily. On the other hand, unlike some other

professional fields (natural sciences, forexample), in this field, language is of specialimportance, because language and texts are thetool legal professionals are working with as wellas objects analyzed by them. Because of this, thelegal language has a certain number ofparticularities such as the clarity of expression(legal norm, for example, applies to all citizens)and the precision (ambiguity opens the door forabuses). Of course, these legal language featuresimpose strong requirements when writing ortranslating legal texts because the translator isdealing with a challenge to write or to produce,through a translation, a text that should be clearand accurate, without any changes in thetransferred meaning.

In order to avoid mistakes, the translator isobliged to analyze challenges imposed by thesource text that can be viewed on different levelsfrom terminology up to the textual level. In thispaper, we will focus on the way terms are combinedinto complex units and the contribution ofterminology resources to their proper translation.In fact, the term complex lexical (word) units1 designatesmemorized complex lexical units composed of two ormore words, connected in different ways. Dependingon the type of mutual ties of these words, theseunits are divided into two groups: collocationsand phrasemes.

Translating legal collocations from French intoMacedonian and vice versa

The term collocation is derived from the Latinwords cum (with) and locare (to place) and it designates

1 The equivalent of this term in French is theterm unités lexicales complexes whereas English uses termslike polylexemic word-groups, multi-word (expressions, lexical units).

the closeness between the lexical units, thewords. “The term "collocation" designates theusual association of a word with others words inthe sentence, excluding the existing grammaticalrelations between these words. For example,although the words “construction” and “construire”belong to two different grammatical categories,they have the same collocations, i.e. they areused with the same words”.2

Collocations suggest possible associations ofwords in a language that do not depend on thespeaker. Words combine in different ways thusobtaining different meanings, but unlikephraseological expressions, the relation betweenwords is not figurative, and the meaningrepresents a sum of separate meanings.

For example, in English the word bribe iscombined with the verb to take, so the collocation isto take a bribe. The same word in French or inMacedonian is combined with other verbs. In Frenchthe term pot-de-vin is combined with the verbs accepter(accept), toucher (touch). In Macedonian the term мито iscombined with the verbs прима, зема. One can imaginethe possible errors in translation if the term pot-de-vin is combined according to the Macedonian model*prendre des pots-de-vin.

This type of errors is not spotted orcorrected by the simple grammar and spell checkprograms and the translators are usually obliged

2

? (Dubois, Mathée : 19994) “On  appelle “collocation” l’association habituelle d’un mot avec

d’autres au sein de l’énoncé, abstraction faite des relations grammaticales existant entre ces mots : ainsi, les mots „construction“ et „construire“, bien qu’appartenant à deux catégories grammaticales différentes, ont les mêmes collocations, c’est-à-dire qu’ils se rencontrent avec les mêmes mots”. 

to consult terminology resources - dictionaries.There are some specialized dictionaries dedicatedjust to the way words are combined in sentences.In French, a very exhaustive resource is theDictionnaire des combinaisons de mots published byDictionnaires Le Robert in 2007 that has 2600 keywords. Usually, these dictionaries concern wordsof the general language, though terms belonging tosome specialized fields are to be spotted amongthem.

In the dictionary, collocations are presentedin alphabetical order, according to the term thatrepresents the core of the collocation and thenthey are grouped by their grammatical structure.For example, the term justice is presented in thisway:

verb + noun justice bafouer, fuir, obtenir, réclamer, rendre, saisirправда исмејува, бега од, добива, бара, дели правда, се

обраќа до суд(justice trample, escape, obtain, demand, dispense, go to

Court)

noun+verbjustice trancherправдата пресече, одлучи(the justice decided)

noun+adjective-justice clémente, expéditive, réparatrice, sociale, sommairе,

tardiveмилозлива, брза, корективна, општествена,

експедитивна, задоцнета правда(justice lenient, summary, restorative, social, summary,

delayed)

complex structures-l’exercice de la justice / être inquiété par la justice

извршување на правдата / вознемируван е од страна на правдата

(the exercise of justice /be disturbed by the Courts)-se frotter à la justice / porter une affaire en justiceси има работа со правдата/ покренува судски спор(to have to deal with justice/ring a case to court)-menacer d’un recours en justice/ avoir maille à partir avec la

justiceсе заканува со тужба / има проблеми со законот(to threaten with a law suit/to get into trouble with the law)-échapper à la justice / une justice à sens uniqueизбегнува на правдата / пристрасна правда(to escape justice/ biased justice)-la justice a la main lourde / la justice le rattraperaтешка е раката на правдата / ќе го стигне раката на

правдата(the justice is strict /justice will catch him)-l’acharnement de la justice /des démêlés avec la justiceжестокост на правдата/конфликти со прaвдата(the fury of justice/ in conflict with the law)-une obstruction à la justice / comparaître devant la justiceпопречување на правдата / се појавува на суд(obstruction of justice/appear in court)-être traduit en justice / être en délicatesse avec la justiceповикан е на суд / има проблеми со правдата(to be sued /be in conflict with the law)-être blanchi par la justice / être épris de justiceсудот ослободува некого, прогласува за невин/вљубен

во правдата(be cleared by the justice /committed to justice)

The examples clearly show the differences inword combining verb + noun, noun + verb, verb +adverb or some other type of complement, adjective+ noun etc. They also show the differences inFrench and Macedonian structures.

Collocation structures can vary, but in thelegal language, verb+noun structures are some of

the most dangerous traps for the translator. Theyoften consist of a verb belonging to the generallanguage and of a noun, which is a part of thespecialized, legal language. Still, it should behighlighted that the verb inside the collocationoften obtains a specialized meaning. For example,the French verb casser means “to break” but used inthe collocation casser un jugement it means “to annul ajudgement”. On the other hand, in the expressioncasser un fonctionnaire the same verb means “to dismiss”.

The noun + adjective collocations are moreeasily spotted, even though the same term can havedifferent meanings in the general and in the legallanguage. So the term acte in the general languagemeans “action” and the collocation could be actecriminal (criminal act). On the other hand, in the legallanguage, acte is a legal document and there arecollocations like acte de naissance (birth certificate), acte demarriage (marriage certificate), acte de décès (death certificate).

Still, when this type of word combination indifferent languages is concerned the contexts arenot identical in different languages. That is thecase of the two adjectives juridique (legal) and judiciaire(judicial). The first term concerns law in general,while the seconds concerns justice rendered by theCourts. Their Macedonian equivalensts are theMacedonian terms правен and судски. For example, normejuridique (legal rule) is translated in Macedonian asправна норма, while pouvoir judiciare (judicial power) istranslated as судска власт. Still, this equivalencedoes not apply to all contexts, because thecollocation conseils juridiques (legal advice) is to betranslated as правни совети while the adjectivejudiciaire in the collocation assistance judiciaire (judicialassistance) has the same Macedoian equivalent as inthe first collocation правна помош.

The legal translator or legal expert wantingto make sure that they are combing the wordscorrectly can consult general languagedictionaries. For example, the dictionary LeRobert (2000) gives the verbs going with the termjugement -prononcer, rendre un jugement (render a judgment).

As far as Macedonian dictionaries areconcerned, the Macedonian-French dictionary(Француско-Македонски речник (Попоски, Атанасов:1992)) presents some collocations, allowing to thetranslator the possibility to correctly use theterm, but it is not exhaustive and does not giveall the possible word combinations. For example,the term jugement is represented only as a part ofthe collocation prononcer un jugement.

In the terminology databases available on theInternet, collocations are presented in differentways. In the European Union terminology database,IАТЕ3, terms are presented in narrow contexts foundby the translators in the texts they were workingon. An important part of these contexts iscollocations.

The GRANDDICTIONNAIRE4 base, on the otherhand, gives the definition of the terms, but thecontexts, the collocations are not presented.

An important monolingual French terminologyresource available on the Internet is Le Trésor de lalangue française (informatisé)5. This resource concerns thegeneral language, but because of itscomprehensiveness, numerous legal terms can befound. For example, for the term plainte one can find

3 http://iate.europa.eu/

4 http://www.granddictionnaire.com

5 http://atilf.atilf.fr/

a detailed definition, the use of the term ingiven larger contexts as well as a list ofcollocations: porter plainte (to lodge a complainte) ; déposerune plainte (file a complaint); plainte en escroquerie (charge ofraud); retirer sa plainte(withdraw the complaint). Still, acertain flaw of this representation is the factthat the meanings of the collocations are notgiven and the translator or the legal expertshould continue their search in some otherresources.

In the specialized legal dictionaryJuridictionnaire,6 the key words are followed by longlists of syntagmas, collocations and expressions,and they are presented according to the structureof the syntagma, the collocation, or theexpression. For example, the term contrat is followedby 15 different possible structures, and the mostnumerous are nous+article+contract (acceptation ducontrat, administration du contrat, analyse du contrat etc.) andverb+article+contrat (accepter un contrat/accept a contract,acquérir un contrat/acquire a contract, adjuger un contrat /award acontract etc.).

The way words combine is of great importancefor a correct translation from French intoMacedonian and vice-versa. Still, collocations areparticularly important in the legal language,being distinguished from the general language bythe specific term combinations. As we mentionedbefore, Macedonian and French collocations havedifferent language elements. The term пресуда andthe term jugement combine with different terms inthese two languages. So while Macedonians sayизрекува пресуда French use the collocation prononcerun jugement. In this case, there is a certainequivalence between the elements of the two

6http://www.termiumplus.gc.ca/tpv2guides/guides/ juridi/index-eng.html?lang=eng

collocations. Still, this is not the case with theMacedonian collocation донесува пресуда and theFrench rendre un jugement. One can only assume all theerrors that a translator could make if he does notknow well the professional field and itsterminology. If he follows the Macedonian modelдонесува пресуда he could offer an erroneoustranslation *apporter un jugement.

Collocations play a key role in translatinglegal texts because of the necessity of precisionand accuracy. It can be illustrated with thefollowing example. In French, the terms contrat(contract), loi (law), jugement (judgement) combine with theverb executer (execute), but in Macedonian each ofthese terms are combined with different terms.Therefore, we say реализира, спроведува договор;спроведува закон; извршува, постапува по пресуда.

Прирачник за преведување на правните акти наРепублика Македонија7 is a good resource concerningthe use of Macedonian legal collocations. Thisresource is the fruit of the process oftranslation of the aquis communautaire. It presentsmany collocation in English, French, German andMacedonian, set up in parallel columns and evenoffers larger contexts and whole sentences. Forexample, we can find simple collocations such asprogramme d’action (action programme) - акциска програма andcommunication interprétative (interpretative communication) -информација со образложение. But there are also wholesentences like portant approbation de la conclusion par laCommission de l’accord X (Conclusion by the Commission of theagreement X) containing one or more collocations, inthis case porter approbation. The suggested Macedonianequivalent is со која се одобрува склучување на7 http://www.sep.gov.mk/data/file/Preveduvanje/prirachnik%20za%20preveduvanje%20na%20pravnite%20akti%20na%20EU.pdf

Спогодбата Х од страна на Комисијата. The positiveaspect of this resource is the fact that itspecializes in legal terminology and gives bothFrench and Macedonian collocations. It is,however, sometimes difficult to use because theexamples are not alphabetically ordered, butthematically.

Thus far we have been concerned withcollocations that have two or at most threeelements, but the legal language is also rich inlonger and more complex collocations that cannotbe found in the general language or in thespecialized dictionaries and databases. In suchcases, the translator has to have a profoundknowledge of the domain, of the professionalterminology and a long professional experience.For example, надомест на нанесена штета is translatedas réparation du préjudice subi (compensation for damages),адвокат по службена должност - avocat commis d`office(appointed lawyer).

In the proper translation of thecollocations, the Internet can be very helpful.Using the browser, the translator can checkvarious contexts and thus see whether a particularcombination of words in the target language iscorrect.

From the above it can be concluded thatsimple collocations are present everywhere andthey can go unnoticed, therefore they are amongthe most common causes of errors in translation.For example, the translator of the MacedonianConstitution in French8 has used the collocation lamotion de censure est posée thus combining the term motionde censure with the verb poser imitating the8 The French version of the Macedonian Constitution is available at http://www.sobranie.mk/constitution-de-la-r-publique-de-mac-doine.nspx

Macedonian collocation model Прашање за доверба наВладата можат да постават … Still, in French theword motion de censure combines with other verbsprésenter or déposer une motion de censure (propose a motion ofcensure).

A similar mistake in the same translation wasmade in the translation of the article 68 of TheConstitution:

„Собранието за вршење на работите од својатанадлежност донесува и одлуки, декларации, резолуции,препораки и заклучоци“.

In the French translation, we find the verbapporter (to bring) corresponding to the Macedonian verbдонесува, but just in terms of their isolatedmeaning. In practice, used in context, theycombine differently. The verb apporter can only becombined with the terms recommandations andconclusions, and the translator should have opted forthe verb adopter that can be used in the abovementioned article.

A proof that the collocations are the mostfrequent source of errors is also the translationof the European Convention on Human rights. Thetranslator translated the English collocationeffective remedy with the erroneous Macedoniancollocation ефективен лек and not правен лек(Jakimovska : 2013).

Collocations compose the tissue of onelanguage, and their spontaneous use indicates thatthe person has mastered the foreign language atthe highest level.

Translating legal phrasemes from French intoMacedonian and vice versa

Collocations are not to be confused withphrasemes (phraseological units). In the prefaceto the Nouveau Petit Robert (2009) phraseological

units are defined as “group of words forming a unit thatcannot be modified. “9

Phraseological expressions are complexmemorized expressions that are immediatelydetected by the language community because theypossess a certain degree of figurative meaning.For example, in the French expressions branches dudroit (branches of law), lacunes du droit (gaps in the law), corpsadministratif (administrative body) and their correspondingMacedonian equivalents гранки на правото, правнипразнини, административно тело it is obvious that theterms branches, lacunes (gaps) and corps (body) havemetaphorical meaning.

Phraseological units are autonomous on asyntactic and on semantic level.

Thus, the French expression se fairе la justice,means “to revenge” (се одмаздува) or “to commitsuicide” (сам си пресудува, се самоубива). Phraseme’selements can be used separately, but with theirseparate use, this meaning will be lost. Hence, wesee that the expression has a semantic autonomy –autonomy that concerns the meaning.

Besides the semantic, phrasemes also have asyntactic autonomy. For example, the phraseme coupd`Etat (putsch), possesses not only semantic, but alsosyntactic autonomy which means that the word orderof its elements cannot be changed *coup étatique. Thesame applies to the Macedonian equivalent државенудар. Used separately in different contexts, thesame words државен and удар obtain differentmeanings and syntactic reformulations such as *ударна државата are impossible.

Traditionally dictionaries arrange termsalphabetically. The authors first explain thevarious meanings of a word and then they giveadditional explanations of some specific uses,

9“groupe de mots formant une unité et ne pouvantpas être modifié à volonté”.

such as figurative meanings and the use of theterm in phrasemes.

In the general online dictionary Le Trésor de lalangue française (informatisé) phraseological units arealso part of the term representation. Thus, afterthe definition of this term and after the list ofcollocations the dictionary presents thefigurative expression donner un coup de canif dans lecontrat (de mariage) for which the following explanationcan be found: “tromper, commettre une infidélitéconjugale (to be unfaitfull, to commit adultery)”.The explanation is afterwards illustrated by anexample of its use in larger contexts.

Specialized dictionaries often also givephrasemes secondary importance, i.e. they areindicated as particular contexts in which theappropriate term is used. However, the Juridictionnaire,a dictionary that analyses legal terms in manyrespects, gives detailed lists not only of thesyntagmas and collocations, but also of thephrasemes in which the term is found. For example,for the term contrat the dictionary offers about 80expressions containing this term such as: à l’issue ducontrat (at the close of this agreement);le contrat est venu àexpiration (the contract expired); contrat conclu à distance (distancecontract); exécuter les obligations du contrat (perform thecontractual obligations); transférer des biens par contrat (transfer ofproperty by contract). The expressions are not ordered bytheir grammatical structure but alphabeticallyaccording to the first word of the phraseologicalunit.

Again, a Macedonian resource for legalphraseological expressions is Прирачник запреведување на правните акти на Република Македонија. Inthis resource the phrasemes are not presentedseparately, but as the collocations they are partsof larger contexts. For instance : définie par leConseil sur la base de l’article X du traité sur l’Union européenne

(defined by the Council on the basis of Article X of the Treaty onEuropean Union). The Macedonian translation isдефиниран од Советот, врз основа на член X од Договорот заЕвропската унија. The positive aspect of this kindof representation is the fact that the equivalentsare bilingual and offered in the larger, legalcontext. Still, because the translations refer tolarger unknown contexts there are some grammaticalirregularities: définie is дефиниранa and notдефиниран.

In dictionaries that deal with phrasemes,they are presented alphabetically according to thekeyword of the phraseme. Very often thesedictionaries refer to the general language, butthey also include some phrasemes that are relatedto or a part of the legal language.

In all traditional terminology resourcesphrasemes are presented alphabetically followingthe phrasemes keyword. This approach isquestionable because in practice, we do not noticethe phrasemes by their keyword but we perceivethem as a whole without paying close attention totheir individual elements. Therefore, thistraditional presentation of the phraseologicalunits does not correspond to the way they arememorized and used. The development of theinformation technology has led to a revolution interms of the representation of phrasemes.Databases, as well as programs for the automatictext processing provide accurate and detaileddescriptions of the use of phraseological units.The fact that one linguistic unit or one wordappears frequently in structures with figurativemeaning is not seen as an exception, but as arule.

With the collocations, the translator canmore easily make a mistake in translation, becausehe can sometimes overlook the specificities in the

combination of terms, whereas when he encountersthe phraseological expression, the context usuallyindicates that the terms are not used in astandard way, but that they are part of anexpression with a figurative meaning. Therefore,they are detected with greater ease, and theappropriate equivalent for phraseme can be foundby consulting general and specializeddictionaries, although the most detailedinformation about its meaning and use can be foundin the phraseological dictionaries.

Of course, today the translator can useresources available on the Internet, as a quickway to find the appropriate equivalent. Someterminology banks such as GRANDDICTIONNAIRE do notallow search of phrasemes but just of the keywords, unlike the terminology database of theEuropean Union, IATE, which allows search ofphrasemes as a whole.

When creating programs for automatictranslation, phrasemes are considered as separateentities and the program does not translateliterally the separate terms but translates thephrasemes in whole indicating their meaning.

When phrasemes are translated from onelanguage to another, the translator may faceseveral different situations. Thus, the phrasemescan be equivalent in terms of elements andmeaning. Or phrasemes may contain differentelements, but can carry equivalent meanings.Finally, sometimes for the phraseme of the sourcelanguage there is not any phraseme carryingequivalent meaning in the target language. In thiscase, the translator interprets the meaning thatthe source language phraseme carries. These threesituations can be illustrated by the followingexamples:

1. loi de la jungle - закон на џунглата (law of thejungle). In this case the constituents of bothphrasemes are identical, and they transmit thesame meaning, i.e., when one refers to the law ofthe jungle, the meaning is that there are no lawsgoverning, and as in a jungle, everybody tries tosurvive by any means.

Sometimes, this equivalence in form andmeaning is due to the common heritage from theRoman law. The expressions charge de la preuve andтоварот на доказите (burden of proof) are identicalbecause they are both following the Latin modelonus probandi in which onus literally means “burden”.That is also the case of the French expressioncombat judiciaire (judicial combat) and the Macedonianexpression правна борба, битка.

In other cases, the equivalence is due to thefact that the legal domain shares a certainsymbolism that surpasses national borders. That isthe case of Lady Justice, a statue allegoricallyrepresenting the justice and wearing a blindfold.This representation gave birth to the metaphoricalexpression la justice est aveugle (blind justice) or правдата еслепа in Macedonian referring to the neutrality ofdispensing of justice.

In this group, we can also mention thephrasemes loi-cadre (frame-law) - рамковен закон, parentésanguine (blood kinship) - крвно сродство, marché noir (blackmarket) - пазар на црно; de plein droit (full right) - со полноправо...

2. blanchimеnt d’argent - перење пари (moneylaundering). Although there is a certain similarity interms of the elements structure, French uses theterm bleaching (белење) and Macedonian the term washing(перење).

3. à bon droit - праведно, исправно. There arealso some other examples of French phrasemestranslated by paraphrasing: hors-la-loi (outlaw) –

одметник, разбојник, ајдук, loi du talion (law of retaliation) –одмазда со иста мера (око за око заб за заб, мило за драго).Translation becomes especially complicated whenthese metaphorical phraseological units designatea concept characteristic for the French legalsystem that does not exist in the Macedonian legalsystem. The term nudité juridique (legal nudity) wouldliterally be translated in Macedonian правнаголотија, but it should be explained that in Franceit designates lack of what is necessary forsomething to be legally valid.

In the Macedonian legal language the phrasemeвладеење на правото (rule of law) is often used, forwhich there is no adequate French translation sothe phraseme is translated with the expression Etatde droit or its meaning is transferred with theexpression autorité de la loi. Expressions of this typeare also крвна одмазда – vendetta.

The translator should also pay attention tothe language register to which the phrasemebelongs. Although phrasemes find their place inthe legal language, they are usually avoided inofficial documents, because, due to theirillustrative character and figurative meaning,they provoke certain associations and emotions,while the legal language should be emotionallyneutral. Usually, phrasemes whose elements arelegal terms are used in everyday language, inorder to comment, with a certain irony, on theexperience of the contact with the judicialsystem. An example of this kind is the Macedonianphraseme кадија те тужи, кадија те суди, which findsits equivalent in the French phraseme être juge etpartie (to be judge and jury).

In the end, we can mention a group of legalphrasemes ordered according to their grammaticalfunction.

Adjective phraseme:

Être raide comme la justice (to be very rigid) - mногуригиден (строг како професор)

Verb phrasemeFaire la justice à quelqu`un (to do justice to somebody) –

оддава признание некому, признава нешто некомуAdverb phrasemeIl n`y a pas de justice (there is no justice) - не е праведно

(нема правда)Être volé comme dans un bois(to be robbed) - ограбен до

гола кожаNoun phrasemeAffaires d`Etat (matter of the State)- државнички работи

(иронично)

ConclusionFrom the above analysis, several conclusions

can be made.First, in order to perform the translation

properly, the translator is obliged to recognizenot only the meaning of certain terms, but alsothe ways in which they are combined. Because theFrench and Macedonian legal language have certainterms inherent in the domain, which may becombined in a specific way, it is necessary thatthe translator possess not only language skills,but he should also understands the topic to whichthe source text is referring. Thus, it seems thatfor the translator, collocations impose morechallenges then the phrasemes, because he has toperceive when in the target language words arecombining in a way characteristic only for thatlanguage. If he spots a collocation, then he willcertainly find its equivalent in the terminologyresources.

On the other hand, because of the syntacticand semantic independence of the phraseologicalunits, they are easily recognized and thechallenge for the translator relates more to the

way he will transfer the phraseme in the targetlanguage. We should also mention the very frequentidentity in form and meaning of these legalexpressions due to the common heritage andsymbolism that different legal systems share.

As for terminology resources and the waysthey present these complex lexical units, it maybe noted that the development of the informationtechnology has made the search for a correspondingcollocation or phraseme much easier. Thetranslator can make a fast search and verify thetranslation of the word combination in a largenumber of databases and documents. This technologyhas also made possible the representation of thephraseological expressions as a whole.

There is large number of monolingualterminological resources in French focusing on thelegal domain or covering phrasemes andcollocations in general. These resources includenot only traditional monolingual dictionaries butalso numerous online dictionaries and databases.As far as legal experts and legal translators areconcerned, the most exhaustive French languageresource is the Juridictionnaire. Bilingual terminologyresources from French to Macedonian and vice versaare not at all numerous. The only legal resourcewhere legal collocations and phrasemes in Frenchand Macedonian can be found is Прирачник запреведување на правните акти на Република Македонија,which sometimes is lacks precision and in whichcollocations and phrasems are not representedsystematically. One of the objectives of thispaper is to point out the existence of gaps in theMacedonian terminography concerning the complexlexical units and the field of law in general,with the hope that these gaps will be filled inthe future.

Bibliography:

1. Атанасов, Петар, & Попоски Алекса.Македонско-Француски речник, Просветно дело,Скопје, 2007.

2. Атанасов, Петар, & Попоски Алекса. Француско-Македонски речник, Македонска книга-Просветно дело, Скопје, 1992.

3. BOCQUET, Claude. 1992. « Phraséologie et traduction dans les langues de spécialité », Terminologie et traduction nº 2/3, p. 271-284.

4. Cornu, Gérard. Vocabulaire juridique, PUF, Paris,1987.

5. CORNU,Gérard: Linguistique juridique, coll. «Domat droitprivé», Paris, Éd.Montchrestien, 1990.

6. DAGUT, M.: “Can metaphor be translated?”, Babel:International Journal of Translation, XXII, 1976.

7. Christina Dechamps : Traduction juridique etétude des collocations : quelles

perspectives ? in parallèles , Octobre 2013. 8. Dubois, Jean & Giacomo Mathée. Dictionnaire de

linguistique et des sciences du langage, Larousse, 1994.9. Gémar, Jean-Claude & Kasirer Nicholas.

Jurilinguistique, entre langues et droit, Editions Themis, 2005.10. Jakimovska, Svetlana Linguistic and translatology

analysys of the European Convention on Human Rights in BalkanSocial Science review, n.2, 2013.

11. Le Fur, Dominique & Freund Yaël. Dictionnairedes combinaisons de mots, Le Robert, 2007.

12. Le Robert, Maury-Eurolivres, France, 2000.

13. Nouveau Petit Robert, Dictionnaires Le Robert,2009.

14. Никодиновски, Звонко. Фигуративните значењана инсектите во францускиот и македонскиот јазик, 2-ри АвгустС, Штип, 2007. стр.59.

15. Pesant, Ghislaine & Thibault Estelle. “Pourune combinatoire phraséologique de la publicité desdroits”, Meta, vol. 43, n° 2, 1998, p. 328-331.

16. Прирачник за преведување на правните актина Република Македонија, Секретаријат за европскипрашања, Скопје, 2012.

17. Устав на Република Македонија, Службен весникна Република Македонија, Скопје, 2001.