title在法律英语中怎么翻译

『壹』 法律英语中，ownership和title区别，是不是两者都翻译为所有权，两者有区别吗

虽然不懂法律英文。但是我能理解的意思如下：

ownership：这是法律名词，表明了标的物的所有权，非常确定的关系
title：这就是个标签，声称的意思，不一定包含ownership关系，也不承诺是ownership的关系

『贰』 法律英语中有哪些经典表达

英文合同中有一些比较特定的，也就是在其他类型的文章中不容易出现的表达。这些句式和短语在其他文章类型以及日常用语中出现的频率非常之低，以至于当它们出现在英文合同中时，总是给让人一种陌生的感觉。其实，如果你是法律英语专业出身或者经常会有机会接触英文合同，你就会发现这些特定的表达数量并不算多，只是我们很少去归纳和总结而已。现在，我们就来总结一下，也欢迎各位法律英语专业人士来补充。
1、In accordance with/pursuant to 依据/依照/按照……的规定
合同是当事双方的“法律”。合同的目的在于尽最大可能使合同项下的交易行为依照法律规定或约定来开展，从而双方的交易变得具有可预见性。因此，合同中会经常出现“依据……的约定（规定）来……”的表达。在长期的合同翻译实践中，当需要表达依据时，专业法律人士倾向于使用in accordance with 或pursuant to.
2、In respect of/ in connection with/ with respect to 就……
在英语合同的翻译中，我们经常会遇见这样的表达，以表示对相关事物的限定。而在一般的英语文本中，当表达或提及到某一特定的事物时，我们通常会用concerning/regarding/in relation to/relating等。这些词如果放在法律文本中，则会让人感觉比较随意，不像in respect of 那样庄重、正式。
3、Except (for)/ unless 除非……；除……外
英文合同中经常会对一些例外的情况进行规定，最常见的表达是“除非……另有规定，否则……”，这里最常见的搭配是unless otherwise provided/stipulated, Party A shall not....比如，except as provided/stipulated in Article XXX，我们通常翻译为“除本法第XXX条的规定外”
4、Notwithstanding... 无论……如何规定；尽管有……的规定
作为介词，notwithstanding在普通的英文文本中很少出现。但其在英文合同中的出现频率却相当高。Notwithstanding的含义和普通英文文章中常见的although/though/even if没有太大分别，最明显的区别在于在法律合同中，notwithstanding中后面常跟名词性短语。比如：Notwithstanding the foregoing，一般翻译为“尽管本合同前述条款有所规定……，但……”
5、Provided that... 但（前提）是……
Provided that一般在法律合同中会出现在主句的后面，表示一种限定或者是前面主句所存在的条件。法律界通常称这种句子为“但书”（proviso）。
6、For the purpose(s) of... 就……而言；在……中
这又是一个在英文合同中经常出现的短语，不熟悉法律英语的译者在遇到这个短语时，可能第一个反应就是“为了……目的”。但其实在法律合同中，这个短语的表达其实并非我们想象的那样简单。大家都来擦亮眼睛，看看下面这个句子：FASIMILE SIGNATURES. The signature on this Agreement of any party that is faxed to the other party, will be deemed an original signature for the purpose of enforcement of this Agreement. 请问有多少人看了这个句子，会本能的将for the purpose of理解为“出于……之目的/为了……”？合理的译文：传真签名。通过传真方式发送给另一方的任何一方在本协议上的签署在本协议的实施中将被视为原始签署。For the purpose this Agreement, all costs of arbitration shall be borne by the losing Party unless otherwise stipulated by the arbitration tribunal.就本协议而言，所有仲裁费用应由败诉方承担，除非仲裁庭另有规定。
7、Subject to... 根据……的规定；在不抵触……的前提下；受制于……
该短语在法律英文中一般都跟agreement, section, contract等法律文件名称或文件中特定的条款名配合使用。通常可以翻译为“以……为条件”、“根据……的规定”、“在符合……的情况下”、“在不抵触……规定的情况下”等。
8、Without prejudice to... 在不影响……前提下；不影响……这个英文法律短语的功能相当于普通英文中的without affecting。与subject to 的用法相同，跟在without prejudice to这个短语之后的通常是一个指代某项法律条款的名词。其所包含的限制含义没有subject to那么强。看看下面这个例句：Without prejudice to section 24, the following shall be treated as properly executed...参考译文：在不影响第24条规定的情况下，以下协议应视为正式签订……。
9、Where... 如果……；凡……；……的
在普通英文中where通常用来引导地点状语从句或定语从句，但在法律英文中它常用于引导条件状语从句。其意义相当于in the case，即“凡……”、“如……”。
法律合同翻译犹如浩瀚的海洋，唯有在翻译的过程中抱着一丝不苟的态度，勤于查询、勤于积累并能够不断的消化和吸收，我们才能够自在徜徉并有信心为客户带来最优质的翻译作品。
编者注：以上内容由译锐翻译编辑整理自《英文合同的翻译与起草》，作者：王相国；

『叁』 法律英语术语翻译的问题

registered designs 专利设计
the law of confidence 保密法（或商业机密法）
passing off 终止，完成
trade libel 商业诽谤

『肆』 title，在法律上，是什么意思，怎么翻译

在法律文本中，title通常有以下几种含义：（1）权利；（2）头衔，职位；（3）所有权；（4）契约，文书等。
例句一 权利
The full title to the Shares, free and clear of any and Encumbrances, and the full right to vote for the Shares shall be transferred to the Buyer at the Completion Date.
不附带任何权利负担的股份的完整权利以及股份的全部投票权应当在交割日转让给买方。
例句二 头衔，职位
He was given the title of assistant manager.
他被授予经理助理的职位。
例句三 所有权 title transfer所有权转让
The Vendor shall procure that the Purchaser acquires good title to the Shares free from all charges, liens,encumbrances, equities and claims whatsoever.
卖方应保证买方获得不容置疑的股份所有权，且该等股份不带任何押记、留置、负担、权益和主张。
例句四 契约，文书
the instrument (such as a deed) that is evidence of a right 证明权利的文书（如契约 ）例：title document契约文书

『伍』 一词 有多种翻译 但在法律英语中“under”和“

在法律翻译中，"under"通常与协议，合同，法律，法规等连用。若与协议、合同等连用，译为”在......项下"；若与法律、法规等连用，可译为"根据、依据、按照"等。

『陆』 Speech or Debate Clause在法律英语中应该怎么翻译

是美国宪法的一个条款，目的是为了保护两院议员自由发言权，可以翻译成议员言论责任豁免条款。

『柒』 法律英语问题

在标题18的第2340款

subsection是法律文书的分项。
如：请翻到第5款，b项：Please turn to section 5, subsection b.

如有不明白之处，请消息联系。

『捌』 法律英语中"where"一般怎么翻译

一般讲where在法律英语中通常是当.....什么样的情况发生时 1是表时间 相当于 when 当....时 2是表状态发生 相当于 if

汉语说法是：什么什么的，表示if 比如 where a party fails to performs....

『玖』 急需帮忙！法律英语论文的Title

O. J. Simpson murder case
辛普森杀妻案

The O. J. Simpson murder case has been described as the most publicized criminal trial in history,[1] in which O. J. Simpson, former American football star and actor, was brought to trial for the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman. Simpson was acquitted in 1995 after a lengthy trial, the longest jury trial in California history.[2]

Simpson hired a high-profile defense team led by Johnnie Cochran and F. Lee Bailey. Los Angeles County believed it had a solid prosecution case, but Cochran created in the minds of the jury the belief that there was reasonable doubt about the DNA evidence (then a relatively new type of evidence in trials),[3] including that the blood-sample evidence had allegedly been mishandled by lab scientists and technicians.[4] Cochran and the defense team also alleged other misconct by the Los Angeles Police Department. The televising of the lengthy trial riveted national attention on the dramatic case. By the end of the criminal trial, national surveys showed dramatic differences between most blacks and most whites in terms of their assessment of Simpson's guilt.[5]

Later, both the Brown and Goldman families sued Simpson for damages in a civil trial, which has a lower standard of proof for determining responsibility.[citation needed] On February 5, 1997, the jury unanimously found there was a preponderance of evidence to find Simpson liable for damages in the wrongful death of Goldman and battery of Brown. In its conclusions, the jury effectively found Simpson liable for the death of his ex-wife and Ron Goldman.[6] On February 21, 2008, a Los Angeles court upheld a renewal of the civil judgment against him.

这个案子很经典，上面的一段是wiki上的英文案例，你可以找一些关于这个的中文资料，然后选择一个角度（比如种族歧视与陪审团制度的矛盾、毒树之果原则、媒体和舆论与司法公正的矛盾等等），或者一篇参考的中文文章（很多中国的法律人也会研究这个案子，发表一些观点），自己写或者翻译一篇英文论文出来就是了。

下面引用一段英文资料，有个人在www.lawyers.com提问，为什么法院在刑事诉讼中判决辛普森无罪，但是在民事诉讼中又判决他赔偿自己妻子死亡赔偿金。 Jeralyn Merritt对这个问题进行了简略的回答。

我想你大一的论文，字数要求不会太多，所以参考一下他这段答复吧。如果字数不够就把上面wiki的资料加一些进去,简单的交待一下案情。

Q. I am a high school government student, and I have a question that has been bothering me that my teacher refuses to answer. In the O.J. Simpson case I know that the state jury did not find him guilty on the charge of murder, but the federal court did on the charge of wrongful death. What is the difference and why were they able to do that?

-- Geni

A. O.J. Simpson was charged with first degree murder in the state court in California. The jury found him "Not Guilty." A "not guilty" verdict means the state failed to prove the charges "beyond a reasonable doubt", which is the standard of proof in all criminal prosecutions. Criminal cases are brought on behalf of the citizens of a particular state or federal district, not by the victims or their families.
After O.J. Simpson was found not guilty in the criminal case, the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman sued him in the state (not federal) court in California for wrongfully causing their deaths. Civil lawsuits for wrongful death are tried for money damages, not to put the defendant in prison. Civil cases are brought in the name of indivials, not in the name of the State.

Different evidence was introced in the O.J. Simpson civil and criminal trials. For example, although O.J. Simpson denied it, evidence was presented in the civil trial that O.J. Simpson owned a pair of Bruno Magli shoes that matched shoeprints left at the murder scene.

O.J. Simpson exercised his constitutional right against self-incrimination and chose not to testify in the criminal trial. All defendants in criminal cases have this right. In the civil trial, O.J. no longer had such a right because he had been found not guilty of murder and could not be tried again for it. He had to testify when the opposing side called him as a witness. Thus, the jury in the civil case got to hear O.J's testimony while the criminal jury did not.

In the criminal case, the jury got to see that the glove left at the scene of the crime did not fit O.J. Simpson. This experiment was not repeated for the civil jury. The jury in the criminal trial got a far stronger portrayal of the problems with the DNA and other scientific evidence in the case, and the poor management of the crime scene, than did the civil jury. And the criminal jury got to hear the false testimony of Los Angeles police officer Mark Furman, who later admitted lying and pleaded guilty to perjury.

Finally, the burden of proof in criminal and civil cases is different. In criminal cases, the standard is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt." There is also a presumption of innocence that stays with the defendant until and unless the jury returns a guilty verdict. In civil cases, the standard of proof is "by a preponderance of the evidence," which essentially means "more likely than not," or put another way, proof by 51% or more.

The jury's verdict in the civil case was not that O.J. Simpson was guilty of murder, but that he was liable for (which essentially means responsible for causing) the deaths of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman.

In light of the different evidence presented, burdens of proof and ultimate issues the juries were called upon to decide, the verdicts in the criminal and civil trials were not really all that inconsistent.

-- Jeralyn Merritt

『拾』 法律英语中的“等”要怎么翻译

一般情况用省略号或者用etc，不使用and so on