Pragmatic Challenges in Legal Oral Translation

Abstract

This article examines the pragmatic dimension of legal translation, concentrating on how speaker intention, implicature, and illocutionary force influence legal meaning across languages and institutional contexts. Drawing upon linguistic pragmatics (Austin, 1962; Grice, 1989; Searle, 1969) and functional approaches to legal translation (Šarčević, 1997; Cao, 2007), the study analyses how pragmatic elements — such as formality, politeness, and indirectness – affect both the accuracy and performative validity of legal discourse. Through a qualitative, discourse-pragmatic methodology, the research identifies key areas of risk where pragmatic misinterpretation can lead to distortions of institutional stance, loss of trust, or legal invalidity. Findings highlight that legal translators function not merely as linguistic intermediaries but as pragmatic mediators whose interpretive choices preserve or transform the illocutionary and strategic force of legal texts. The paper argues that pragmatic awareness constitutes an essential professional competence for translators, especially in conflict or negotiation settings where meaning is strategically constructed. Finally, the study recommends integrating pragmatic training, risk-based quality assurance, and intercultural competence into translator education to strengthen the reliability and ethical integrity of multilingual legal communication.