Abstract
Introduction
Translating legal texts is a complex and challenging task where accuracy is crucial to ensure the translated text retains the same legal force and meaning as the original, especially given the potential political consequences of errors (Šarcevic, 2000). Legal translation studies is affected by different disciplines, including law, social sciences, history, and culture (Li & Hu, 2022, p. 158). The courtroom, characterized by extensive spoken communication, exemplifies the critical nature of legal translation (Wu et al., 2025a; Yang & Wang, 2021). Courtroom translation is vital for access to justice, particularly in multilingual settings where accurate communication is necessary for fair proceedings. The differences between common law, typical in English-speaking regions, and civil law systems prevalent in Chinese-speaking areas further complicate legal translation due to variations in terminology and procedural norms (Cheng & He, 2016).
While existing research has investigated legal translation challenges (Al-Tarawneh et al., 2024; Biel, 2022; Sopjani & Hamiti, 2022; Prieto Ramos, 2023), these studies primarily focus on European contexts. Similarly, Chinese research has concentrated on translating from Chinese to English, with fewer studies addressing the reverse (Cheng et al., 2017; Chan & Galdia, 2023; Luo, 2024; Qu, 2023). Although numerous studies have examined courtroom translation issues (e.g., Cheng & He, 2016; Prieto Ramos, 2023), there is a notable gap concerning translators’ perceptions of these challenges and their solutions. Translatorial Action Theory (Holz-Mänttäri, 1984) emphasizes the translator’s expertise (Pym, 2023), a perspective often overlooked in current scholarship. This highlights the need to understand translators’ views on courtroom translation challenges (Wu et al., 2025b, 2025c), as emphasized by Orlando and Gialuz (2017), who point out the neglect of translator perspectives within a focus on translation products and processes. Examining these perceptions is, therefore, essential.
The International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE), known as the Tokyo Trial, began on April 29, 1946, to bring the leaders of Imperial Japan to justice for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and crimes against peace in the period preceding and during WWII (Mei, 2018). Ensuring linguistic accuracy in legal proceedings is vital for upholding justice, especially in complex multilingual contexts. The English-to-Chinese translation of the IMTFE trial records serves as a significant case study, highlighting the specific challenges and solutions encountered. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for historical accuracy and contemporary legal translation practices.
Building on the factors influencing the translation decisions identified in Wu et al. (2025b), this study intends to address the following research questions based on the framework of TAT:
To facilitate this exploration, the paper is organized as follows: Following the introduction, Section 2 offers a Literature Review that synthesizes existing scholarship on courtroom translation and associated challenges. Section 3 outlines the Methods used, detailing the research design, data collection, and analytical framework for the study. Section 4 presents the Results, divided into two parts: Section 4.1 analyzes the translation challenges encountered by translators in the English-to-Chinese IMTFE context, including language style, proper noun translation, and consistency issues; Section 4.2 discusses the translation solutions adopted by the translators, emphasizing their interactions with other stakeholders in the translatorial action. Section 5 provides the Discussion, interpreting the findings and examining their broader implications for historical and legal translation while assessing the strategies’ effectiveness within the IMTFE context. The Conclusion summarizes the key findings and their significance.
Literature Review
Global interconnectedness necessitates effective multilingual communication across various socio-professional contexts such as business, diplomacy, education, and law (Kuek et al., 2024; Tee et al., 2022). The following section critically examines key scholarship through two lenses: product-oriented approaches that focus on textual features and functional equivalence in legal translations (e.g., Sopjani & Hamiti, 2022; Prieto Ramos & Guzmán, 2023) and translator-oriented perspectives that explore practitioners’ decision-making processes and competence development (e.g., Ali, 2016; Altuwairesh & AlGhamedi, 2025).
Product-Oriented Legal Translation
Research on legal translation in the European context has identified various challenges and solutions. Prieto Ramos (2023) investigated how legal translators make terminological decisions, evaluating the adequacy of translations about the legal distinctiveness of terms and the impact of intra-textual inconsistencies on quality. Sopjani and Hamiti (2022) conducted a comparative analysis of legal lexical units between Albanian and English, uncovering translation errors and challenges stemming from these language differences. Similarly, Al-Awawdeh and Al-Shamayleh (2023) identified key obstacles in legal text translation, such as finding suitable equivalents, unfamiliarity with the English legal system, and interpreting legal nuances, while proposing strategies to address these issues. Additionally, Prieto Ramos and Guzmán (2023) examined the reliability of institutional term banks, finding that a systematic approach to legal lexicography enhances term record reliability, correlating positively with translators’ evaluations of these records.
In addition to the studies conducted in European contexts, researchers have also explored translation challenges and solutions in legal translation between Chinese and English. Cheng et al. (2017) identified issues in Chinese-to-English legal translations and reexamined equivalency concepts in this field. Chan and Galdia (2023) examined the unique features of Chinese legal language, emphasizing the difficulties in translating Chinese law due to legal transfers from foreign languages like English. Qu (2023) reviewed 90 years of English translations of Chinese civil laws, particularly The Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China, underscoring the importance of semantic, text-type, and formal equivalence principles, alongside four sub-strategies: professionalism, colloquiality, accuracy, and ambiguity. Lastly, Luo (2024) analyzed the influence of cultural factors, including language, legal systems, institutional structures, and mindsets, on the translation of legal terminology between Chinese and English from a comparative legal culture perspective.
Translator-Oriented Legal Translation
Ali (2016) explored the linguistic challenges in English-Arabic legal contract translation in the Gulf, identifying terminology gaps (especially culture-specific and Latin/French borrowings), syntactic complexity, and layout conventions as key obstacles from a survey of 33 Sudanese translators. Al-Tarawneh et al. (2024) discussed the preparation of legal translators, emphasizing the need to enhance the perception of their roles and modernize training models by integrating their function as intercultural mediators. Additionally, Altuwairesh and AlGhamedi (2025) analyzed legal translation pedagogy from trainee perspectives, finding that challenges include archaic, semi-technical, and technical terminology, alongside complex syntax. Their study also highlighted the importance of collaborative practice, domain exposure, and portfolio development as effective solutions.
While existing studies (e.g., Al-Tarawneh et al., 2024; Cheng et al., 2017; Chan & Galdia, 2023; Sopjani & Hamiti, 2022; Luo, 2024; Prieto Ramos, 2023; Qu, 2023) have explored legal translation challenges, few have taken a translator-centered approach to examine translators’ perceptions regarding the challenges and solutions in translating historical-legal documents, neglecting their role as active decision-makers. This study adopts such an approach in English-to-Chinese courtroom translation, representing a significant shift from traditional perspectives. Grounded in Holz-Mänttäri’s (1984) TAT, which positions translators as experts in translational actions (Pym, 2023), it addresses a critical gap in research that often overlooks the insights of these “translation experts.” By centering the translator’s perspective, this approach uncovers the authentic, context-specific challenges translators face and the practical solutions they devise. Empowering translators is crucial not just theoretically, but also for enhancing accuracy, procedural fairness, and the integrity of justice in cross-linguistic legal contexts. Thus, this study bridges these gaps by investigating translators’ perspectives on challenges and solutions in English-to-Chinese IMTFE translation and its implications for training legal translators, ultimately improving the quality and reliability of courtroom translation services.
Methods
In this study, a qualitative method was used to explore the perspectives of nine translators on the challenges and solutions in courtroom translation based on TAT. Qualitative studies, particularly those exploring specialized fields like courtroom translation, often prioritize depth of insight over breadth of representation. In this study, the selection of nine translators was purposefully designed to reflect a narrow yet rich context, specifically, the English-to-Chinese translation of the trial records related to the IMTFE. The group included full professors, as well as associate professors and lecturers. Each participant was carefully chosen based on their extensive experience in legal translation and their academic qualifications, ensuring that their insights are grounded in deep professional engagement with the subject matter. All interviewees have published translations in this field, significantly contributing to the credibility and relevance of their perspectives within the context of historical legal translation. Data saturation was actively pursued throughout the study, meaning that the data collection continued until no new themes or insights emerged from the interviews. This approach reinforces the validity of the findings, as it underscores the depth of understanding gained from these nine experts. To address concerns about representativeness, future research could engage a more extensive participant pool, incorporating translators from various legal backgrounds and geographical locations. Table 1 provides an overview of the nine translators’ profiles.
An Overview of Interviewees as Respondents.
The data was collected using semi-structured interviews with those translators. Each interview session lasted approximately 50 min on average, providing sufficient time for in-depth exploration of participant perspectives while maintaining focus. To ensure accuracy and facilitate detailed analysis, all interview sessions were digitally audio-recorded using the Dingding Meeting, contingent upon obtaining explicit participant consent prior to commencement. Following data collection, the audio recordings were transcribed verbatim using the Xunfei Tingjian speech recognition service to generate accurate textual records of the dialogues. To ensure the utmost accuracy and fidelity of the textual data, the resulting transcripts underwent a rigorous manual proofing process by the authors. This involved systematically comparing the transcripts against the original audio recordings to correct any errors introduced by automated transcription. The verified transcripts subsequently constituted the primary dataset for qualitative analysis. Thematic analysis was then systematically conducted using NVivo 14 software. Following a comprehensive familiarization with the transcripts, open coding was employed to generate initial nodes that encapsulated salient concepts emerging from the data. These preliminary nodes were subsequently refined into subnodes, capturing nuanced distinctions in the participants’ perspectives. Through an iterative process of comparison and meticulous review, the study categorized related subnodes into higher-order themes, which informed the overarching thematic development of the analysis. Building on an open coding process, deductive coding informed by TAT was used to structure thematic analysis around the theory’s core concepts, thereby enhancing the analytical depth and practical relevance of our findings for translator training. Additionally, this study maintained a reflexive log to document coding decisions, thereby ensuring methodological consistency and enhancing the traceability of our analytic process.
To ensure analytical rigor and bolster intercoder reliability, a systematic approach was implemented. Two researchers independently coded a randomly selected subset of transcripts (approximately 20%). Following this initial coding phase, they convened to compare interpretations, resolve discrepancies through discussion, and collaboratively refine the codebook definitions and application criteria until consensus was reached. This calibrated codebook was subsequently applied by the primary coder to the entire dataset. Throughout the analytical process, regular peer debriefing sessions were conducted to foster reflexivity and critical examination of emerging themes. The interview questions adapted from Wu et al. (2025a, 2025b, 2025c) are as follows:
(1) Please describe your position as a translator, and your role as an English-to-Chinese IMTFE (i.e., “the project”) translator?
(2) What translation challenges have you encountered in the project? How do you cope with those challenges?
(3) How do you describe the role and task of translators in general? Do you think translators should have any additional qualities for the project?
(4) Please explain how you used the translation guidelines for the project.
(5) Please describe how you interacted with the “initiators” of the project.
(6) Did you receive any suggestions and feedback from peers or initiators regarding your translations? How did you incorporate this feedback into your work? (e.g., meetings, discussions, mentorship, etc.)
(7) What recommendations would you offer to future translators working on similar projects?
Results
Four main themes were identified (Table 2): (1) challenges in language style; (2) challenges in legal terms; (3) challenges in proper nouns; and (4) challenges in consistency related to proper nouns, legal terms, and historical events. The translators’ perceptions of these challenges are discussed in the following section.
Summary of Themes Related to Translation Challenges in the Project.
Translation Challenges in the Project From the Perspective of Translators
Translation Challenge in Language Style
Participants identified language style as a significant challenge in the project, highlighting three contributing factors (Table 3). They examined the stylistic characteristics of court trials and the features of Classical Chinese speeches. The project aims to preserve the original language style to provide readers with an immersive and accurate understanding of the historical trial, requiring translators to convey both factual content and the courtroom language style of the era. As one translator noted, this involves using a combination of formal and informal language in courtroom examinations.
Speaking of the form of words, I think you, in the text, there are also different types of legal text. For example, sometimes it’s the court trial and it’s like conversation. So, you need to translate the examination into oral Chinese, right? Oral Chinese, it’s not that formal … (#06)
Translation Challenge in Language Style.
The translators discussed the challenges of translating speeches in Classical Chinese, noting that the language has evolved significantly over time. This evolution complicates efforts to preserve the original meaning and style of historical documents. To address this, translators considered the linguistic context of the era, as Classical Chinese (wenyanwen) was the dominant written form, necessitating its use for accurate translation of historical texts.
… When I was translating the text which is about maybe the 17th century or the 15th century, and I would like to think what Chinese was like in that time. For instance, in the 15th, 16th or 17th century, the Chinese was wenyanwen. So, I would translate something from the 16th century into wenyanwe. (#01)
The following example illustrates the challenge of translating the statement in the Imperial This example highlights the challenge of translating the Imperial Rescript into Classical Chinese. The translation during the IMTFE proceedings needed to adapt to the formal conventions of Classical Chinese (wenyanwen). Given that the Rescript embodied supreme imperial authority in its original Japanese context, translators aimed to convey a similar solemnity in the target language by deliberately utilizing Classical Chinese syntactic structures.
Example 1 ST: … the Imperial Rescript issued on the conclusion of the Tri-partite Pact paraphrases “hakko ichiu” and says, “It is indeed a great teaching of our Imperial ancestors that the Great Cause shall be propagated all over the eight corners of the world and the whole humanity on earth shall be deemed one family. To thus a gust teaching we endeavor to adhere day and night.” TT: …
Translation Challenge in Proper Nouns
All translators acknowledged the challenges of translating proper nouns in the project, focusing on two main themes: places and names, and institutions and military ranks.
(1) Translation of places and names.
Almost all translators identified the translation of places and names as a great challenge in the translation (Table 4). R05 explained that: So, we have to make sure you know the terms, the proper names, you know, including the Japanese names, American people’s names, the places, and the historic events … (#05)
Translation Challenge in Places and Names.
Translators often struggle to find accurate information about obscure places or individuals, necessitating extensive research to ensure accuracy and maintain the work’s authenticity and reliability. Additionally, they face challenges due to inconsistent naming conventions for the same person or location. As noted by R02, these issues include incorrect spellings, varying titles, and disparate name usages: The issues regarding personal names vary from wrong spelling, different titles, and inconsistent use of names referring to the same person.
The inconsistent rendering of the proper noun “Taiwan” in Examples 2 to 3 within the IMTFE documents presents a significant translation challenge, exemplified by the fluctuating use of the terms “Formosa” (
Example 2 ST: … on that date, the accused HATA was Commander-in-Chief of the Taiwan (Island of Formosa) Army and that he did not arrive in Japan until August 26, 1937, about seven weeks after the outbreak of the war with China. TT: … Example 3 ST: “It is their purpose that Japan shall be stripped of all the islands in the Pacific which she has seized or occupied since the beginning of the first World War in 1914, and that all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa, and the Pescadores, shall be restored to the Republic of China” (“Cairo Declaration, 1943” as cited in Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, 2001). TT:
Moreover, the inconsistent use of the event in Examples 4 to 5 as either the “Mukden Incident” (
Example 4 ST: As the accused ARAKI is charged with entering this conspiracy in 1928, it is respectfully called to the Court’s attention that at the time of the outbreak of the Manchurian Incident the accused ARAKI held no portfolio. TT: Example 5 ST: In prosecution exhibit No. 157, the affidavit of SHIMIZU, the affiant states that OKAWA, while drunk, made certain statements concerning the Mukden Incident. TT:
(2) Translation of institutions and military ranks.
Translators faced significant challenges in translating institutions and military ranks, alongside issues with places and names, during the English-to-Chinese IMTFE translation (Table 5).
… The second is the ranks, the military ranks. We know there are lots of differences in terms of military ranks, among Chinese ranks, American or British ranks, and Japanese ranks. So we spend a lot of time on that. (#01)
Translation Challenge in Institutions and Military Ranks.
The translator highlighted that military ranks possess unique structures and terminologies that differ across countries, necessitating both linguistic proficiency and an understanding of each nation’s military hierarchy. The translation of military ranks and foreign institutions in the IMTFE proceedings, such as Ambassador OTT’s conferral of German honors on Japanese officers (Generals SUGIYAMA and DOHIHARA, Lieutenant General KIMURA, Major General SATO, and Colonel NINOMIYA), demonstrates the challenge of achieving both terminological precision and cross-cultural equivalence. Translators faced inherent difficulties in consistently rendering hierarchical Western military ranks (e.g., “General,” “Lieutenant General,” “Major General,” “Colonel”) into standardized Chinese equivalents (
Example 6 ST: Ambassador OTT, after handing the ‘Grand Cross of the German Eagle’ to General SUGIYAMA and DOHIHARA and Lieutenant General KIMURA,’ Order for Merit with Star’ to Major General SATO and ‘First Class Order For Merit’ to Colonel NINOMIYA, stated as follows … TT:
In addition, a particularly significant challenge commented by the translators concerns the verification and accurate translation of institutional names found in the translation. Translating these entities from English to Chinese necessitates meticulous cross-referencing and historical research due to several factors: the complex historical context of the Far East during the relevant period, frequent organizational restructuring or renaming of military, governmental, and administrative bodies, potential inconsistencies in original nomenclature, and the need to establish precise, historically valid Chinese equivalents. Ensuring the accuracy of these institutional translations is paramount for maintaining the historical integrity and legal precision of the tribunal records, as misidentification can lead to factual inaccuracies regarding responsibilities and structures.
In the process of translating the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE) documents from English to Chinese, several challenges have been encountered. One such challenge involves the verification of institutions … (#09)
The translation of the Japanese institution “Military Affairs Bureau” in Example 7 within the IMTFE proceedings exemplifies significant challenges in achieving terminological precision and contextual equivalence for bureaucratic positions. This institution, situated within the complex hierarchy of the Imperial Japanese Army Ministry, carried substantial administrative and strategic weight.
Example 7 ST: In 1938, I became major general. In October of 1939 I was appointed Chief of the Military Affairs Bureau. TT: 1938
Translation Challenge in Legal Terms
In addition to the challenges of translating proper nouns, translators also remarked on the difficulties associated with translating legal terms (Table 6). The following statement highlights the formal nature of legal texts, especially international law and various signed pacts in the English-to-Chinese IMTFE translation.
Still, there are some challenges related to legal terms, and the legal documents … I should always pay attention to the legislation. For the language style of this legislation, I should ensure its specialty, solemnness, and accuracy … (#07)
Translation Challenge in Legal Terms.
The translator emphasized the complexity and formality inherent in legal texts. Legal documents often require precise language and adherence to specific terminologies, making them challenging to translate accurately. The inclusion of international law and signed pacts adds another layer of complexity, as these elements must be interpreted within the correct legal framework and context.
This is further discussed by another translator. It emphasizes the need for translators to have a strong understanding of legal terminology and international agreements to ensure the translation is both accurate and faithful to the original text.
And some of the challenges remain today. For example, those legal terms, because we’re not professionals from the legal profession. This is the first challenge … (#08)
The translation of international agreements and legal terminology in Example 8 of the IMTFE proceedings, such as the “Anti-Comintern Pact,” “Tri-Partite Pact,” and “No Separate Peace Pact,” poses significant challenges in achieving terminological precision and contextual fidelity. Translators needed to convert specific treaty names, rich in historical and political meaning, into standardized Chinese equivalents while maintaining their legal integrity and the prosecution’s argumentative weight.
Example 8 ST: We submit that in relation to the Anti-Comintern Pact of 1938, renewed in 1941, the Tri-Partite Pact of 1940, and the Cultural and Trade Agreements signed between Japan in 1933 and 1939, and the No Separate Peace Pact of 1941, the prosecution contends that these agreements signed by the military representative on behalf of their separate countries were concluded with the view of obtaining the ends of Count 5 in the Indictment, and preferred charges thereunder against all persons participating in the conclusion of said treaties and agreements. TT:
Translation Challenge in Maintaining Terminological Consistency
Translators often face challenges in maintaining terminological consistency, particularly with proper nouns, legal terminology, and historical events (Table 7). As R03 noted: Another aspect is that my translation may not be consistent with what other translators did. Therefore, I would discuss with them. And if necessary, we even had a meeting online or offline to fix the translation of the important term …, like the proper nouns for places and people. So there is a lot of work and effort there. (#03)
The respondent emphasized the importance of consistent translations among different translators, particularly for proper nouns and terms, recognizing the considerable effort and attention to detail involved.
Translation Challenges in Maintaining Terminological Consistency.
Translation Solutions in the Project From the Perspective of Translators
This section presents the categories and themes identified through thematic analysis of selected interview data. The analysis specifically explores the translation solutions employed to address the translation challenges. Two main topics were identified in the thematic analysis: (1) engagement with stakeholders in the translation process, and (2) the requirement for translators.
Engagement With Stakeholders in the Translation Process
Table 8 outlines three key themes regarding interactions in the translatorial action. First, it highlights collaboration with subject-matter experts in the project, showcasing knowledge exchange. Second, it addresses the guidance from project initiators that ensured translation accuracy and consistency. Lastly, it emphasizes teamwork and communication among translators to tackle translation challenges.
Summary of Themes of Interactions With Players in the Translatorial Action.
(1) Collaboration with subject-matter experts in the project.
Translators emphasized that structured, iterative dialogue with domain subject-matter experts was instrumental in navigating the project’s complex translational challenges (Table 9). This collaborative engagement was not merely beneficial but essential for resolving difficulties and guaranteeing terminological and conceptual accuracy. As R02 noted: Additionally, Shanghai Jiaotong University Publishing House, along with experts from the Institute for War Crimes Trials, regularly holds meetings for discussions and guides problems encountered during the transition. These meetings have helped me overcome many difficulties and have been of great assistance. (#02)
It is further discussed by R06 in the following statement.
Consultation with experts is another critical aspect, as their specialized knowledge in legal and historical contexts ensures the translation’s authenticity and adherence to appropriate terminology. (#06)
The translation of Example 9 underscores the translator’s critical reliance on collaboration with subject-matter experts, highlighting the indispensable value of interdisciplinary expertise for achieving precision. To accurately render the source text, the translator needed more than linguistic skill; they required deep historical knowledge to correctly identify the author’s name (
Example 9 ST: “… Author: TANAKA, Tomoenosuke, the Complete Edition of Shishi-O’s works. ‘On National Polity,’ published in January 1932. (This treatise was originally published during the Taisho era, in an earlier writing by the same author, which was incorporated into a complete edition.) TT:
Collaboration With Subject-matter Experts in the Project.
(2) Engagement with initiators of the project.
Alongside expert engagement, communication with the project’s initiators is equally essential to guaranteeing translation quality (Table 10). As R03 explained: Yeah, of course, they give us some instructions or briefs before we take this project. And now, when I was really doing this project, I would find that sometimes it is difficult to fully follow the instructions. At that time,
The respondent noted practical challenges in the translation process, indicating that adherence to initial instructions was difficult. They advised that translators should adopt a proactive stance by seeking clarification directly from the project initiators and emphasized the need for ongoing interaction to ensure effective implementation of the guidelines.
Engagement with the initiators of a translation project is of paramount importance, as it ensures that the translation aligns precisely with the project’s overarching translation instructions. This collaboration is particularly critical when dealing with historically sensitive documents, such as the records of IMTFE. In instances where a textual anomaly—such as a suspected typographical error—is identified in the source text, the translator’s role is not to unilaterally correct the perceived error, as this would compromise the textual fidelity and archival integrity of the document. Instead, the translator must adhere to a strict protocol, validated through prior consultation with the project initiators, which mandates the insertion of a scholarly footnote. This footnote
Example 10 ST: The 26 November note from the United States to the Japanese Government was accepted as an ultimatum and brought a virtual end to the Japanese hopes of a TT: 11 …
The translator detailed the careful process of finalizing translations for historical documents, emphasizing the need for thorough revisions and addressing all comments from initiators before final approval. These interactions ensure that the translation aligns with guidelines, preserving its credibility and reliability. Table 10 illustrates these interactions.
Engagement with Initiators of the Project.
(3) Peer collaboration with translators in the project.
The translators stressed that peer collaboration was an indispensable component of the complex translation workflow (Table 11). This sentiment is illustrated in the following comment: … Mentorship from
Collaborating with other translators on the English-to-Chinese IMTFE translation enriches the process with diverse perspectives and expertise, improving both quality and accuracy. This teamwork guarantees linguistic precision and contextual fidelity to the original text. R08 emphasizes that these collaborative exchanges foster a supportive atmosphere, which in turn significantly improves the project’s overall translation quality and efficiency.
… we usually have a regular meeting every month with team members in the process of translation …. (#08)
The respondent stressed the importance of both formal and informal joint efforts with peers, noting that online forums serve as a vital channel for real-time problem resolution and mutual assistance during translation.
Example 11 illustrates that peer collaboration is indispensable for ensuring accuracy and fidelity in the translation of culturally resonant texts, such as classical Confucian works. The rendering of a passage such as, “Their persons being cultivated, their families were regulated …”, into its corresponding classical Chinese formulation (“
Example 11 ST: For example, Confucius in Confucianism says, “ TT:
Peer Collaboration With Translators in the Project.
Expectations From Translators of the Project
(1) Cross-referencing with valid and reliable sources.
In addition to the translation interactions with the players in the translatorial action, translators are also expected to cross-reference with authoritative sources when addressing translation challenges (Table 10). To ensure terminological precision and consistency for place names and personal names, R01 described a process of consulting multiple sources, including cartographic materials, academic texts, and specialized dictionaries.
For the names for places, of course, except for the famous one, i.e., Tokyo. For the smaller ones, you may need to
In addition, R06 cross-referred with the Chinese legislation and pacts to ensure the faithful rendering of both the meaning and the language style in the translation. The respondent emphasized the importance of utilizing authoritative sources to maintain the integrity and quality of the translated text.
So, for the texts, for the legislation, or the pacts. … And then I tried to search for the, you know, the equivalent Chinese legislation or something like that, the translation of the English ones, right? And I think I was quite lucky, and for most of the legislation, so for most of the famous pact, I managed to find the official version of translation, I think, and that solved my problem. (#06)
The translation of this excerpt demonstrates the profound necessity for translators to function as researchers, actively cross-referencing authoritative literary and historical sources to navigate complex translatorial challenges. This process is essential for achieving both textual accuracy and profound contextual fidelity.
The term “HAKKO ICHIU” (
Furthermore, the translation of the poem itself requires meticulous cross-referencing with Japanese literary sources. The footnote identifies Saito Hidesaburo as the translator of the poem into English, not the author. To ensure the Chinese translation is accurate, the translator must first locate Saito’s original English translation (“O universal brotherhood! Where art thou fled and gone? …”) and then verify its fidelity to the original Japanese poem’s meaning, style, and meter (Table 12).
Example 12 ST: “ ‘O universal brotherhood! Where art thou fled and gone? Why rage the sea and tempest where The sun but lately shone?’ (TN: Translated by SAITO Hidesaburo) TT:
Cross-referencing With Valid and Reliable Sources.
(2) Requirements for translators of the project.
Translators identified key requirements for ensuring quality translation, categorized into four main themes: (1) professional knowledge, (2) language proficiency, and (3) a sense of responsibility (Table 13). For example, R02 highlighted the importance of having a legal background, though a law degree is not strictly necessary. The translator noted that understanding relevant background information and specific legal terminology can be acquired as needed.
Because I know that most of us,
In addition to professional knowledge, R05 emphasized that language proficiency and a sense of responsibility are crucial for producing high-quality translations.
I think the basic one and the most important one is the
The respondent emphasized that linguistic competence is the foundational requirement for translation. However, he also noted that a translator’s attitude, including dedication and commitment, is vital for producing high-quality translations alongside technical skills.
Requirements for Translators of the Project.
Discussion
The thematic analysis of English-to-Chinese translations for the IMTFE identifies major challenges, including adapting court trial language, translating proper nouns (such as names and military ranks), and accurately conveying legal terms. Maintaining consistency among translators also emerged as a significant issue. These difficulties resonate with the findings of Sopjani and Hamiti (2022) regarding culturally embedded terminology, highlighting the lack of standardized terminology, which often results in errors due to ad hoc translations.
Recent discourse in legal translation emphasizes the concepts of fidelity and functionality, reflecting on how translator agency in courtroom settings is influenced. Translators must balance adherence to the source text with the purpose of the translation, a requirement that is particularly challenging when dealing with culturally specific terms (Biel, 2022; Leung, 2014; Šarcevic, 2000).
The challenges faced by IMTFE translators align with Chan and Galdia’s (2023) analysis of diverse linguistic-cultural systems and mirror Ali’s (2016) observations among Sudanese practitioners, where terminological precision proved to be a common hurdle. The inconsistency in IMTFE translations correlates with Prieto Ramos and Guzmán’s (2023) studies, indicating that intra-textual inconsistencies negatively impact translation quality due to gaps in standardized resources.
The translation dynamics within IMTFE illustrate the importance of collaboration among specialists, initiators, and translators. Factors such as the translators’ competence, raised responsibility, and professional knowledge are crucial for effective courtroom translation, reflecting Altuwairesh and AlGhamedi’s (2025) findings regarding group dynamics in enhancing problem-solving skills.
Moreover, the study highlights the need for effective bilingual legal dictionaries to tackle culturally embedded terminology, advocating for better training in legal terminology to reduce semantic errors (Sopjani & Hamiti, 2022). Al-Awawdeh and Al-Shamayleh (2023) point toward the integration of digital tools to improve translators’ legal-cultural proficiency, aligning with the demands of the IMTFE project.
Translator subjectivity poses additional layers of complexity in translation, which can influence interpretations significantly (He et al., 2024). Concerns regarding limited autonomy within the hierarchical structure of the IMTFE were expressed by translators, paralleling Zhao’s (2023) argument for recognizing translator roles in enhancing legal proceedings’ integrity.
The findings from the analysis offer a rich ground for examining TAT in the high-stakes, historically specific context of courtroom proceedings. TAT, pioneered by Holz-Mänttäri, conceptualizes translation not merely as a linguistic transfer but as a complex, purpose-driven communicative action involving multiple players within a specific socio-professional situation. The findings highlight the critical influence of interactions with specialists, initiators, and fellow translators, alongside the paramount importance of translators’ competence in sourcing, responsibility, language, and professional knowledge, which both robustly support core TAT tenets and extend its application in this unique historical-legal environment.
The findings strongly validate TAT’s fundamental premise that translation is a collaborative process embedded within a network of players. The significant influence of interactions with specialists (e.g., legal experts, historians), initiators, and other translators directly reflects TAT’s emphasis on translation as a collaborative process involving dynamic interplay between players within the translatorial action. These interactions determined the scope, purpose, acceptable strategies, and terminological choices for the translations.
TAT positions the translator as an expert responsible for cross-cultural communication. The findings confirm this by underscoring that translators’ competence, particularly their ability to cross-reference authoritative sources (legal codes, historical documents, glossaries), their deep sense of responsibility (awareness of legal consequences, historical weight), language proficiency (mastery of legalese in both languages), and professional knowledge (understanding courtroom procedure, legal concepts), were crucial factors. This aligns perfectly with TAT’s view of the translator needing specialized expertise beyond bilingualism to fulfill their role effectively within the action system. Their competence directly impacted the fidelity, clarity, and ultimate usability of the translations within the tribunal.
Finally, while TAT advocates for collaborative expertise, the power imbalances observed within IMTFE constrain translator agency, highlighting an urgent need for systematic training to equip translators with tools for producing accurate and culturally relevant translations. The challenges identified underscore crucial areas for improving legal translator training, calling for a multifaceted approach to address the complexities of historical courtroom translation.
Language Style
Legal texts often feature formal and technical language, which presents challenges for translators. Training programs should focus on developing stylistic competence, helping translators identify and reproduce the appropriate tone and register in the target language. Engaging in practical exercises, like comparative analysis of legal documents, will assist trainees in understanding these stylistic nuances. Furthermore, exposure to various legal documents, such as court judgments, statutes, and contracts, can improve their ability to navigate diverse language styles effectively.
Legal Terms
The complexity of legal terminology necessitates that translators deeply understand both source and target legal frameworks. Effective training must incorporate specialized instruction in comparative law to illuminate the distinctions between common and civil law systems. Furthermore, the development of comprehensive terminology databases is essential for familiarizing trainees with equivalent terms and their contexts. Additionally, collaboration with legal professionals, such as lawyers and judges, offers valuable practical insights into the application of legal terms.
Proper Nouns
Proper nouns, including names of individuals, organizations, and locations, must be precisely translated to prevent confusion. Training should cover transcription and transliteration techniques for accurate rendering in the target language. Programs must highlight the significance of accuracy and offer strategies for verifying and cross-referencing names. Additionally, training should incorporate the use of authoritative sources, such as official government websites and legal databases, to confirm proper noun translations.
Consistency
Maintaining consistency in terminology and style across legal documents and among translators is crucial for clarity and reliability, as inconsistencies can lead to misunderstandings and legal disputes. Training programs should emphasize best practices, including the use of translation memory tools and glossaries, while fostering collaboration and communication among translators to ensure uniformity. Workshops on technology, such as computer-assisted translation (CAT) tools, can further support this goal.
By tackling these challenges through targeted training, legal translators can enhance their skills and produce high-quality translations that meet the rigorous standards of the legal field. A comprehensive approach to training, including specialized courses, practical exercises, and collaboration with legal professionals, will better prepare translators to navigate the complexities of English-to-Chinese courtroom translation, ultimately improving the quality and reliability of their work.
Conclusion
This study qualitatively explores translators’ perceptions of the challenges encountered in English-to-Chinese courtroom translation, particularly within the context of the IMTFE. The findings of this study reveal significant challenges, such as adapting the language style of both courtroom discourse and Classical Chinese, accurately translating culturally embedded proper nouns (including places, names, institutions, and military ranks), conveying precise legal terminology (e.g., legislations and pacts), and ensuring terminological consistency among different translators. In terms of the translation solutions, the translation of the project was significantly influenced by interactions with key players in the translatorial action, including specialists, initiators, and translators. Additionally, translators’ competence in cross-referencing authoritative sources, their sense of responsibility, language proficiency, and professional knowledge were also crucial factors.
To effectively address these challenges, the study highlights the importance of practical training recommendations for legal translators. Training programs should include specialized modules on stylistic adaptation to various legal contexts, emphasizing historical and contemporary language usage. Additionally, courses should facilitate comparative analyses of legal texts in both source and target languages to highlight stylistic nuances. Comprehensive glossaries and databases for relevant proper nouns and legal terms should be established to aid translators in navigating culturally specific terminology and legal frameworks.
Training should also involve practical workshops that encourage collaboration among translators, initiators, and specialists, enhancing learning experiences through real-world simulations and peer support. Assessment methods should evaluate translation accuracy and the use of cross-referencing techniques and authoritative sources, fostering continuous improvement through feedback. Translation project initiators should create an environment conducive to professional development via regular meetings, mentoring, and workshops with legal and translation experts, ensuring translators are well-equipped to tackle the complexities of legal texts.
Targeted training strategies can enhance the quality and reliability of translations in high-stakes legal contexts, improving communication and upholding justice and accuracy in multilingual proceedings. However, the findings of this study, based on the historical context of the IMTFE, highlight challenges specific to that military tribunal and are not easily generalizable to contemporary non-military courts, where legal procedures and constraints differ significantly. While the proposed pedagogical implications are relevant for complex historical-legal translation contexts, their applicability to civil court interpreter training needs further empirical validation across various jurisdictions. Additionally, the generalizability of these findings is constrained by the limited sample size in this study, although this focused cohort provided valuable, in-depth insights. While the results illuminate specific challenges and solutions in English-to-Chinese courtroom translation, they may not encompass the full diversity of perspectives in the field. Future research with larger, more heterogeneous samples is warranted to validate and extend these findings.
Footnotes
ORCID iDs
