Illuminate Legal Terminology™
Law Explorers

Legal research, legal writing, and legal translation are the lights that illuminate the dark, unknown regions in the universe of law.


Can we translate our customary methods and techniques when research transports us into another legal culture?

details »


Cultures and legal systems other than our own have made valuable contributions to the history of written law.

details »


Translation provides a laboratory in which we can learn to elevate our capacity to select and use legal terminology.

details »


Researchers, writers, and translators “must be active and quick eyed, well advised of speech and of [their] terms, and ever glad to learn.”[1]  Dictionaries[2] and other reference works[3] are the resources in which researchers,[4] writers,[5] and translators[6] hunt[7] for legal terms and definitions[8] and for information[9] such as the field of law to which a term belongs.[10]

Lexicography, “[t]he art and science of dictionary making,”[11] has a long history that extends from ancient China, Greece, and Rome[12] to the age of computers.[13]  Some of us have constructed our own provisional dictionaries[14] while we work.[15]

But can a dictionary completely eliminate our doubts with respect to legal terms and definitions?  If “the words of the law are, in fact, the law,”[16] how flexible — or dependable — are the definitions of words?[17]

The more we learn about the functions, limitations, and production of dictionaries, the better we can use dictionaries to locate the legal terms and definitions that we need.  What are some of the relevant details and circumstances?

  • The types of dictionaries[18] and the cost and labor of dictionary projects;[19]
  • the selection of lemmata[20] and the collection of data;[21]
  • the needs of the user[22] and the importance of reference skills;[23]
  • the utility of bilingual[24] and multilingual[25] dictionaries;
  • the implications of sense[26] and sense discrimination;[27]
  • the effects[28] of prescriptive[29] and descriptive[30] lexicography;[31] and
  • the impact of colonialism on language[32] and lexicography.[33]

A law dictionary does not have to be “a rabbit-hole,” and legal terminology does not have to be “a strange or upside-down world.”[34]  If we learn how to evaluate, select, and use a dictionary, we can begin to illuminate legal terminology!

[1] The quoted words were used centuries ago to describe some of the necessary attributes for “the hunter”:

He (the hunter) must be active and quick eyed, well advised of speech and of his terms, and ever glad to learn, and that he be no boaster or jangler.

Edward, Duke of York, The Master of Game (n.p.: [1410]), quoted in C.E. Hare, The Language of Field Sports, [rev. ed.] (London: Country Life, 1949), 173.

[2] What is a dictionary?  The title “dictionary” is a versatile one:

Since the sixteenth century the title dictionary has been used for an increasingly wider range of alphabetic (but also thematic), general (but also specialised), monolingual (but also bilingual and multilingual) reference works, from the polyglot to the historical and the pedagogical dictionary.  At the same time there has been a tendency for other terms to be used as designations for more specialised dictionary genres, e.g. thesaurus, encyclopedia and terminology.

R.R.K. Hartmann and Gregory James, Dictionary of Lexicography (London: Routledge, 2001), s.v. “dictionary” (italics changed to double quotation marks; internal references omitted).

[3] What is a reference work?  Here is one definition:

Any product, such as a published book or a computer software, that allows humans to store and retrieve information relatively easily and rapidly.  The dictionary is the prototypical “reference book”, as it provides structural linguistic and/or encyclopedic information by means of a generally known access system (such as an alphabet).

Hartmann and James, Dictionary of Lexicography, s.v. “reference work” (single quotation marks changed to double; internal references omitted).

[4] A dictionary of legal terms is a valuable resource when we investigate an unfamiliar area of law:

[S]i desconocemos el área de Derecho en la que estamos investigando, el diccionario de términos jurídicos puede ser de mucha utilidad.  Nos ofrece definiciones cortas, directas y simples que nos permitirán identificar los conceptos clave que luego utilizaremos para entrar a las fuentes generales en busca de información específica y detallada.

Luis Muñiz Argüelles and Migdalia Fraticelli Torres, La investigación jurídica en el derecho puertorriqueño: Fuentes puertorriqueñas, norteamericanas y españolas, with the collaboration of Víctor Manuel Muñiz Fraticelli, 4th ed. (Bogotá: Temis, 2006), 137-38.

[5] In the introduction to the original edition of his thesaurus, Peter Mark Roget described how his reference work could serve writers “who are . . . struggling with the difficulties of composition”:

Every workman in the exercise of his art should be provided with proper implements.  For the fabrication of complicated and curious pieces of mechanism, the artisan requires a corresponding assortment of various tools and imstruments. . . . Now, the writer, as well as the orator, employs for the accomplishment of his purposes the instrumentality of words; it is in words that he clothes his thoughts; it is by means of words that he depicts his feelings.  It is therefore essential to his success that he be provided with a copious vocabulary, and that he possess an entire command of all the resources and appliances of his language.  To the acquisition of this power no procedure appears more directly conducive than the study of a methodized system such as that now offered to his use.

Peter Mark Roget, “Introduction to the Original Edition 1852,” in The Original Roget’s Thesaurus of English Words and Phrases: For the First Time American Spelling and Usage Are Incorporated in the Original Roget, rev. Robert A. Dutch, rev. ed. (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1965), xxviii-xxix.

Was the word “instruments” misspelled or misprinted as “imstruments”?  In some instances, “im-” takes the place of “in-,” but “instrument” is not one of those instances.  Michael Quinion, Ologies and Isms: A Dictionary of Word Beginnings and Endings (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), s.v.v. “in-¹,” “in-².”

[6] “Translators are among the most avid users and critics of monolingual as well as bilingual, general as well as specialised dictionaries and other reference works.”  Hartmann and James, Dictionary of Lexicography, s.v. “translator.”

[7] As both a noun and a verb, “hunt” is a synonym of “search.”  Christine A. Lindberg, comp., Oxford American Writer’s Thesaurus, 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), s.v. “search.”  The verb derived from an Old English word that meant “chase wild animals and game.”  Robert K. Barnhart and Sol Steinmetz, eds., Chambers Dictionary of Etymology (Edinburgh: Chambers, 2008), s.v. “hunt.”

[8] “[The legal dictionary] is a work of reference which offers definitions of words and phrases which are either primarily legal terms of art, or which appear in legal texts with specialized meanings. . . . These two categories do not exhaustively cover all the entries in a legal dictionary, nor are they absolutely distinct.  A third category of entries might be words which raise special problems of interpretation or scope when used in a legal context.”  Roy Harris and Christopher Hutton, Definition in Theory and Practice: Language, Lexicography and the Law (London: Continuum, 2007), 155.

[9] What types of information do dictionaries and other reference works offer?

Two classes of information category can be sought or provided: (a) linguistic information about orthography, phonology, morphology and syntax, semantics, etymology, idiomatic and stylistic and other aspects of usage; (b) encyclopedic information about terminology, personal and other names, geographical and historical and other facts, items of cultural-artistic and scientific knowledge.

Hartmann and James, Dictionary of Lexicography, s.v. “information” (internal references omitted).

[10] Labels and tags facilitate the use of a dictionary.  A label is “[a] special symbol or abbreviated term used in reference works to mark a word or phrase as being associated with a particular usage or language variety,” but “[d]ictionaries differ widely in the way they do this,” and “consistency is rarely achieved.”  Hartmann and James, Dictionary of Lexicography, s.v. “label” (internal references omitted).  In lexicography, a tag is “[a] symbol, code or abbreviated term used to mark the part of speech or other syntactic or semantic information of a particular word or phrase in a corpus.”  Hartmann and James, Dictionary of Lexicography, s.v. “tag” (internal reference omitted).

For example, one monolingual law dictionary includes “subject-matter tags that identify the field of law that a particular term or sense belongs to”; those tags include “Antitrust,” “Commercial law,” “Insurance,” “Wills [&] estates,” “Roman law,” and “Civil law.”  Bryan A. Garner, ed., “Guide to the Dictionary,” in Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th ed. (St. Paul: West, 2009), xxvi.  And one bilingual law dictionary uses abbreviations to indicate the assignment of terms to one or more of “the 18 semantic fields of legal language” according to which the lexical items are organized; those 18 semantic fields include “Business law,” “Civil law,” “Community law,” “Company law,” “Insurance,” and “Successions.”  Enrique Alcaraz Varó and Brian Hughes, “Introduction to the 10th Edition,” in Diccionario de Términos Jurídicos: A Dictionary of Legal Terms; Inglés-Español; Spanish-English, 10th ed. (Barcelona: Ariel, 2008), xvii-xviii.

[11] David Crystal, A Dictionary of Language, 2nd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001), s.v. “lexicography.”

[12] “The history of lexicography goes back over 2,000 years, to ancient China, Greece, and Rome.  But there has never been a time when some kind of lexicographical work was not in progress.”  David Crystal, The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language, 3rd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 114.

[13] For practical reasons such as speed and storage capacity, “[t]he computer is in several respects a necessary tool in dictionary making.”  Ole Norling-Christensen, “The Use of Computers in Specialised Dictionary Making,” in Manual of Specialised Lexicography: The Preparation of Specialised Dictionaries, eds. Henning Bergenholtz and Sven Tarp, with contributions by Grete Duvå et al., Benjamins Translation Library 12 (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1995), 31.  But the utility of the computer in the production of dictionaries did not immediately provoke the production of a great number of electronic dictionaries:

[T]he introduction of the computer as an editorial facility did not initially give rise to a corresponding development as regards the finished products, i.e. the dictionaries themselves.  The computer became more and more common as a lexicographic editing tool, eventually becoming completely predominant, but lexicographic data were still distributed by means of print on paper.  Not until the 1990s did dictionaries published in digital form become a more common phenomenon, and not until then could one really start talking about electronic dictionaries — as opposed to the traditional means of distribution, which was now renamed print (or paper) dictionaries.

Bo Svensén, A Handbook of Lexicography: The Theory and Practice of Dictionary-Making (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 437 (emphasis omitted).

[14] “Quite a few dictionaries have been started and some even almost finished before the author realised that he was actually making a dictionary.  This is for instance the case when a translator or a technician writes index cards or notes of LSP terms to which he adds explanations, examples or translation equivalents.”  Grete Duvå and Anna-Lise Laursen, “Preliminary Work: User survey,” in Bergenholtz and Tarp, Manual of Specialised Lexicography, 77.

[15] Legal translators, for example, continually ”build up their own glossaries piecemeal and text by plodding text.”  Enrique Alcaraz Varó and Brian Hughes, Legal Translation Explained, Transaction Practices Explained 4 (Manchester: St. Jerome, 2002), 38.

[16] Crystal, The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language, 406.

[17] Professors Roy Harris and Christopher Hutton noted that the character Humpty Dumpty had posed “a genuine theoretical problem” during a debate with Alice in a novel by Lewis Carroll.  Harris and Hutton, Definition in Theory and Practice, 31.  As Harris and Hutton explained, “if what a word means does ultimately depend on its users, and if its users can be quite whimsical in their use of it, then it is difficult to see how there can be any comprehensive science of lexicography.”  Harris and Hutton, Definition in Theory and Practice, 31.  Here is the relevant part of the debate between Humpty Dumpty and Alice:

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”

“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master — that’s all.”

Lewis Carroll, “Through the Looking-Glass: And What Alice Found There,” in The Complete Illustrated Works of Lewis Carroll, ed. Edward Guiliano (New York: Avenel Books, 1982), 136 (emphasis omitted).

[18] Although “[t]he terminology used to distinguish reference works is extremely fluid,” certain characteristics serve to distinguish between the different dictionary “types” or “genres”: “size,” “coverage,” “format,” “medium,” “functionality,” “predominance of information categories,” “languages,” and “user type.”  Hartmann and James, Dictionary of Lexicography, s.v. “typology” (internal references omitted).  One such characteristic is the basis on which a reference work is organized, for example, by word or by meaning:

The traditional general monolingual dictionary is semasiological in the sense that it provides an explanation of the meaning(s) of a given word by means of definitions or examples, the direction being from word to meaning. . . . More specialized onomasiological dictionaries such as thesauruses, on the other hand, start with a given concept or meaning and provide a range of lexical choices for expressing that concept, the direction being from meaning to word.

R.R.K.  Hartmann, “Thesauruses,” in Concise Encyclopedia of Semantics, eds. Keith Brown and Keith Allan (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2009), 1013.

Traditions of lexicography also have distinctive characteristics.  One of the characteristics of the Arabic tradition of lexicography, for example, is “the conventional arrangement [of dictionaries] by word root.”  Nawal el-Badry, “Arabic Lexicography in Northern Africa, with Special Reference to Egypt,” in Lexicography in Africa: Progress Reports from the Dictionary Research Centre Workshop at Exeter, 24-25 March 1989, ed. R.R.K. Hartmann, Exeter Linguistic Studies 15 (Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1990), 39.  This manner of arrangement originated with the compilation of “the first full-scale Arabic monolingual dictionary . . . by Al-Khalil Ibn Ahmad . . . towards the end of the eighth century [CE].”  El-Badry, “Arabic Lexicography in Northern Africa,” 36.  We can use an Arabic dictionary better after we learn that, “[l]ike its sister Semitic languages, Arabic is based on a consonantal root system, which means that virtually each word of the language is reducible to an abstract consonantal root.”  El-Badry, “Arabic Lexicography in Northern Africa,” 37.

[19] Lexicographer Bo Svensén included these points in his description of the “long and laborious undertaking” of the production of a dictionary:

  • “[O]ne must usually be prepared to wait many years before any very tangible results of one’s work appear.”
  • “[I]t requires great care and thoroughness of those engaged in it.”
  • “Those involved in a dictionary project must also be prepared to address problems in a variety of fields that are not directly connected with the content of the dictionary.”
  • “[D]ictionary work is very costly and very labour-intensive.” 

Svensén, A Handbook of Lexicography, 398.

[20] We use a dictionary to search for a “‘[l]emma’ (plural: ‘lemmata’),” which “is the lexicographical term for what is popularly referred to as entry word or headword.”  Sven Tarp, “Basic Issues in Specialised Lexicography: Basic Concepts in Lexicography,” in Bergenholtz and Tarp, Manual of Specialised Lexicography, 15 (bold emphasis and italics replaced by single quotation marks).  “Most, though not all, lemmata in LGP [(language for general purposes)] dictionaries are words,” but “[s]ome consist of more than one word, some of parts of words.”  Henning Bergenholtz, “Selection: Lemma Selection,” in Bergenholtz and Tarp, Manual of Specialised Lexicography, 99.

[21] The collection and selection of data for a dictionary is problematic when there are differences among the sources of information:

A problematic factor in this context is that different informants may give different answers to the same question, which is often due to their having diverging view on, for instance, prevailing linguistic norms; and since each question, for practical reasons, cannot involve more than a few informants, it may be difficult to draw reliable conclusions from their answers.

Svensén, A Handbook of Lexicography, 40.

The accuracy of definitions, for example, is sometimes limited by disagreement among the available sources, as the compilers of the Diccionario histórico de la lengua española noted:

Procuramos darla con la mayor exactitud posible, basándonos en el testimonio de las autoridades.  Sin embargo, tropezamos con importantes limitaciones para lograrlo.  Con frecuencia discrepan las fuentes de información; en otras ocasiones no nos permiten precisar — e incluso saber aproximadamente — el significado de la palabra.

Rafael Lapesa Melgar, ed., prologue to Diccionario histórico de la lengua española: Seminario de lexicografía; tomo primero a - alá, with the assistance of Salvador Fernández Ramírez et al. (Madrid: Real Academia Española, 1972), 12.

[22] The requirements of the user are an important issue for the planners of a specialized dictionary such as a law dictionary:

Every specialised dictionary is compiled with a certain user type in mind.  From this follows that a profile of the intended users should be drawn up already at the dictionary design stage.  At the same time it should be ascertained in which situations the user is intended to benefit from the dictionary and consequently which types of information should be provided to fulfil the requirements arising in these situations.

Sven Tarp, “Basic Issues in Specialised Lexicography: Specialised Dictionary Functions,” in Bergenholtz and Tarp, Manual of Specialised Lexicography, 20.  However, “[l]exicographical work often proceeds without any prior knowledge of the potential user group, and the dictionary may therefore be said to be the result of the lexicographer’s own conjectures concerning user needs for lemmata, collocations, sentence examples, encyclopedic and linguistic information, etc.”  Duvå and Laursen, “Preliminary Work: User survey,” 77.

The user must determine whether a particular dictionary will meet his or her needs.  The ability to make that determination depends in part on the accuracy of the information that is given about the dictionary:

In metalexicographical literature one may come across the expression “dictionary delinquency”, which is for instance used about the reprinting of dated dictionaries without reference to earlier edition(s).  It is also used to describe a certain advertising practice, the source of which is probably the marketing staff rather than the lexicographer himself.  By way of example, it is not unusual for an advertising leaflet, or the dictionary cover, to advertise a lemma stock far above the actual figure. . . . Only if users are informed, not only of the number, but also of the kind of lemmata contained in the dictionary, will [they] be able to form a realistic opinion of the dictionary, thereby avoiding vain lookups.

Bergenholtz, “Selection: Lemma Selection,” 98-99 (pronoun changed to agree with antecedent).

[23] In lexicography, the term “reference skills” refers to “[t]he abilities required on the part of the dictionary user to find the information being sought.  Very little is known about the behaviour and preferences of dictionary users, except that a knowledge of the access structure employed in the reference work, e.g. alphabetical order, is essential for locating the particular entry in which the information is likely to be found.”  Hartmann and James, Dictionary of Lexicography, s.v. “reference skills” (internal references omitted).  The term “access structure” is used for “[t]hose component parts of the overall design of a reference work which allow the user to search for a particular item of information.”  Hartmann and James, Dictionary of Lexicography, s.v. “access structure” (internal reference omitted).

Unfortunately, users generally ignore the guidance that dictionaries offer:

The ability of the dictionaries to satisfy the users’ need for information is thus not the only factor of importance; the ability of the users to find and make adequate use of the information is equally important.  In order to help them with this, a more or less detailed user’s guide . . . is provided in most dictionaries as part of the outside matter, where the conventions applied in the dictionary are explained.  However, it is a truth universally acknowledged in lexicographic circles that user’s guides are very seldom consulted and that the users rarely take the trouble to learn the various codes, symbols and abbreviations used in dictionaries.

Svensén, A Handbook of Lexicography, 459 (internal reference omitted).

[24] Translators, for example, need to consult more than bilingual dictionaries when their work concerns a specialized language such as that of law:

[A]ny bilingual dictionary for specific purposes can serve only as a first aid to those who consult it.  No bilingual dictionary can be fully exhaustive to cover all situations that a translator may possibly face.  Translators should also work with monolingual specialized dictionaries, lexicons and encyclopaedias in all languages they work with.

Marta Chromá, Legal Translation and the Dictionary, Lexicographica: Series Maior (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 2004), 62.

[25] “Law dictionaries are typical examples of culture-dependent dictionaries.  They are traditionally designed as both [monolingual], [bilingual] and multilingual dictionaries, but . . . the design of multilingual law dictionaries poses a number of problems, so that under normal circumstances such juxtaposed dictionaries are not to be recommended, unless of course they have been designed as a number of bilingual dictionaries.”  Sven Tarp, “Special Problems in Central Types of Specialised Dictionaries,” in Bergenholtz and Tarp, Manual of Specialised Lexicography, 63.

[26] In lexicography, the definition of the term “sense” calls attention not only to its relationship to the terms “definition” and “meaning” but also to the of polysemy and translation equivalence:

One of several meanings that can be established for a word or phrase and covered by a definition in a reference work.  Because of the multiple meanings of words, particularly core items in the basic vocabulary, compilers of dictionaries have for centuries tried to rationalise, discriminate and display these senses for the benefit of users, but there has not always been consistency even within one dictionary.  The problem of sense discrimination which is difficult enough in monolingual general dictionaries . . . is compounded in bilingual dictionaries by that of uneven translation equivalents.

Hartmann and James, Dictionary of Lexicography, s.v. “sense” (internal references omitted).

[27] The term “sense discrimination” refers to “[t]he division inside a dictionary entry of distinct senses of a word or phrase.  Each sub-sense may be marked not only with a sense number, but by additional means. . . . In the bilingual dictionary, each of these senses may have a different translation equivalent, so clear meaning distinction is essential.”  Hartmann and James, Dictionary of Lexicography, s.v. “sense discrimination” (internal references omitted).

[28] “The idea of a dictionary which is devoid of prescriptive intent, or which regardless of editorial intent has no prescriptive effect, is in our view implausible.  Dictionaries are contextualized by users in multiple ways as authoritative, even when the dictionary claims only to offer an accurate description of usage.”  Harris and Hutton, Definition in Theory and Practice, 154.

[29] The term “prescriptive lexicography” refers to “[a]n approach to dictionary-making which is based on normative attitudes as to how a language or language variety should be used rather than the facts observed about its usage.”  Hartmann and James, Dictionary of Lexicography, s.v. “prescriptive lexicography” (internal references omitted).

[30] The term “descriptive lexicography” refers to “[a]n approach to dictionary-making which is based on the observed facts about a language or language variety rather than attitudes on how it should be used.”  Hartmann and James, Dictionary of Lexicography, s.v. “descriptive lexicography” (internal references omitted).

[31] “Between pure description and pure prescription there are elusive grey areas; however, by and large most general-purpose dictionaries should be characterized as partly normative because, in one way or other, a large portion of what they describe is actually made up of linguistic norms already in existence, and this is especially true in those cases where formal characteristics such as spelling and inflection are concerned.”  Svensén, A Handbook of Lexicography, 24.

[32] Portugal was one of the “great colonial empires” that “brought their religion and their language to the peoples they colonised”:

As for Portuguese, colonisers took it with them to the four corners of the globe, from Brazil in South America to Goa, Macau and Timor in Asia, as well as to the PALOP countries (Portuguese-speaking African countries: Angola, Cape Verde, Guinea Bissau, Equatorial Guinea, Mozambique and São Tomé and Príncipe).  It was also used as a lingua franca in Sri Lanka for centuries.  Today it is evolving in a similar way to other colonial languages: it is still used as the official language in the former colonies, it is the basis of several Creole languages around the world and new varieties are emerging which gain prestige as the embodiment of independent cultures.  Brazilian Portuguese is the best example of this.  As the language of about half the Latin American population and of an emerging economic giant, Brazilian Portuguese is asserting itself as a separate language on an equal footing with Standard Portuguese.

European Commission Directorate-General for Translation, Lingua Franca: Chimera or Reality? (n.p.: Dictus, 2011), 15.

[33] The term “orthography” refers to “[a] standardized system for writing a specific language.”  Crystal, A Dictionary of Language, s.v. “orthography.”  In a dictionary, “[t]he lemma is indicated by means of an orthographic word corresponding to the form of a certain grammatical word.”  Bergenholtz, “Selection: Lemma Selection,” in Bergenholtz and Tarp, Manual of Specialised Lexicography, 99.  With respect to orthography, colonialism has had a detrimental effect on African lexicography:

As regards the issue of orthography, the policies of the colonial governments [in Africa] have had several consequences of linguistic interest.  One which has a direct bearing on lexicography is that little or no attention was given to the development of the African languages.  As a result, relatively few languages have acquired an orthography and become written languages, and even fewer of the languages have shown the beginnings of a written literature.

Mairo Kidda Awak, “Historical Background, with Special Reference to Western Africa,” in Hartmann, Lexicography in Africa, 14.

[34] “In Lewis Carroll’s children’s story Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland (1865), Alice’s adventures begin when she follows a white rabbit down a rabbit-hole and finds herself tumbling down a very deep well, ending up at the bottom in a strange world where she meets a succession of outlandish characters and experiences some bizarre adventures.  Allusions to the rabbit-hole can evoke either entry to a strange or upside-down world, or the action of falling steeply downwards.”  Andrew Delahunty, Sheila Dignen, and Penny Stock, eds., The Oxford Dictionary of Allusions, 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), s.v. “rabbit-hole.”


Title of page Dictionaries
Address of page
Geographic areas China; Greece; Rome; Portugal; Brazil; Goa; Macau; Timor; Angola; Cape Verde; Guinea Bissau; Equatorial Guinea; Mozambique; Sao Tome and Principe; Sri Lanka; Africa
Languages Spanish; English; Arabic; Portuguese
Terms and phrases dictionary; definition; lexicography; term; word; lemmata; user; reference skills; bilingual; multilingual; sense; prescriptive lexicography; descriptive lexicography; colonialism; legal terminology; lingua franca
Metaphors, metonyms, and other figurative expressions rabbit-hole
Events European colonialism
Publications The Master of Game; Definition in Theory and Practice; Manual of Specialised Lexicography; A Handbook of Lexicography; Legal Translation Explained; Lexicography in Africa; Legal Translation and the Dictionary
Authors Luis Muniz Arguelles; Migdalia Fraticelli Torres; Peter Mark Roget; David Crystal; Lewis Carroll
Organizations European Commission Directorate-General for Translation