Rechtstexte unter der Lupe: Lesen Übersetzer anders als Juristen? Eine empirische Untersuchung der Rezeption von Textstrukturmarkern in der institutionalisierten Textsorte des französischen Kassationsgerichtsurteils

Legal texts place particular demands on the reader owing to the institutionalized communication context and their legalized abstract content, not to mention their institutionalized, complex text structure. In this article, the general question “Do (legal) translators read in a different way from legal experts” is narrowed down to the understanding of a particular text genre and its characteristic structure markers: French court decisions rendered by the Cour de cassation. The understanding of texts is driven by inferences. Cognitive approaches distinguish between (necessary) bridging inferences and (optional) elaborative inferences. Whilst the former ensure maintaining a coherent representation of the text, the latter are predictive and based on world knowledge and anticipation of the intended meaning of the utterance. By analyzing the think aloud protocols of 21 participants (professional legal translators, legal experts, students in translation and legal studies), the article focuses on the comprehension of typical structuring markers in this text genre. The following questions will be addressed: Do the typical text structure markers of the court decision trigger the construction of elaborative inferences that control the reading process? Do legal translators show different inference processes than legal experts? Does increasing legal (translation) competence have an impact on inference processes