Tetiana I. Mys’
Senior Lecturer at the Department of Foreign Languages of the Law Institute
Kyiv National Economic University named after Vadym Hetman,
Kyiv, Ukraine
e-mail: tatyanamys@ukr.net
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0009-0000-7582-8214
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24195/2616-5317-2025-41.14
SUMMARY
The article examines the features of English phraseological units in the legal sphere of use. It also analyzes the functioning of phraseological units in legal English, their stability and variability.
The aim of the study is to analyze some phraseological units used in the field of legal discourse. At this stage, our task is to prove the presence of expressive coloring in formalized legal English.
The study used the method of linguistic description of phraseological units, including the methods of observation, interpretation and generalization, as well as methods of analysis of dictionary definitions of phraseological units and methods of structural- semantic, component, contextual analysis. To identify the meaning of phraseological units in legal discourse that is actualized in the process of communication was used the method of functional and discursive analysis. As a result of the study, we came to the conclusion that phraseological units in the legal discourse of the English language reflect cultural traditions, history, and attitudes toward the law among representatives of the Anglo- Saxon culture. In legal discourse, phraseological units perform the function of an intermediary between communicants. Phraseological units are an integral part of legal discourse and represent further study from the point of view of discursive, cognitive, semantic, and pragmatic approaches. Further study of phraseological units of legal discourse is of interest from the point of view of improving mutual understanding between communicants from different cultural and legal systems. The study of territorial and historical variability of phraseological units is the result of linguo-legal processes and can rightfully take its place among linguocultural studies.
Key words: idioms/phraseologisms, phraseological units, foreign language, field of use.
REFERENCES
Barantsev K. T. (2005). Anhlo-ukrainskyi frazeolohichnyi slovnyk [English- Ukrainian Phraseological Dictionary]. 2nd ed., revised. Kyiv : Znannia.
Borysenko I. I., Saienko V. V., Kononchuk N. M., Kononchuk T. I. (2019). Suchasnyi ukrainsko-anhliiskyi yurydychnyi slovnyk [Modern Ukrainian-English Legal Dictionary]. Kyiv : Yurinkom Inter.
Tatarovska O. (2008). Idiomy z nehatyvnoiu poliarniistiu v suchasnii anhliiskii movi [Idioms with Negative Polarity in Modern English]. Visnyk Lvivskoho Universytetu imeni Ivana Franka. Seriia “Inozemni movy” [Bulletin of Ivan Franko Lviv University. Series “Foreign Languages”], Issue 15, pp. 87–96.
Ammer C. (1997). American Heritage Dictionary of Idioms. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Biel L. (2014). Phraseology in legal translation: A corpus-based analysis of textual mapping in EU law. The Ashgate Handbook of Legal Translation [Edited by Le Cheng, King Kui Sin and Anne Wagner], pp. 177–192.
Boatner M. T. (1981). Dictionary of American Idioms. Barron’s Educational Series.
Farlex Dictionary of Idioms. (2015). Farlex, Inc. https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com
Ibrahim B., Yunus K., Abdullahi A. (2018). A corpus-based approach to studies in legal phraseology: An overview. International Journal of English Linguistics, 8(7), pp. 50–58.
Huertas Barros E., Buendía Castro M. (2017). Analysing phraseological units in legal translation. Phraseology in Legal and Institutional Settings. Routledge, pp. 41–60.
Merriam-Webster (1993). Merriam-Webster’s guide to business correspondence. Merriam-Webster, Inc.
Popova O., Krasniuk V. (2022). Legal terminology within the paradigm of some aspects related to modern translation studies. Scientific Research Issues of South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushynsky: Linguistic Sciences, No. 35, pp. 115–127.
Wangdi R. (2007). Legal Dictionary. Bhutan Law Network / JSW Law Research Paper Series No. 18–3.