Hurdles Posed by Idiomatic Expressions Translating Legal Forensic Language

Innovative Research Journal of Sociology and Humanities ISSN(print 3050-6867, ISSN(online): 3050-6875 Volume 02 Issue 12 December 2025 DOI: 10.58806/irijsh.2025.v2i12n04 Page No: 187 - 199 187 Volume 02 Issue 12 December 2025 Corresponding Author: Khalda Abdelrhim Osman Mohmed Hurdles Posed by Idiomatic Expressions Translating Legal Forensic Language Khalda Abdelrhim Osman Mohmed University of Al-Baha Sudan University of sciences &Technology ABSTRACT ARTICLE DETAILS The study aims to avoid some hurdles posed by idiomatic expressions translation legal forensic language. It was carried out in 2024 and was used questionnaire to collect primary data filled by 50 of master translation program in Sudan University of Science and Technology. The results showed: Idiomatic expressions has great role to clarifies translation forensic linguistics according to (34%) of participants were stated that they encountered hurdles in prepositional vs expressions meaning and evoked meaning arises from dialect and register. Idiomatic expressions related to translation forensic linguistic forensic because (32%) of participants were mentioned that culturally specific concepts and expressive meaning related to the speaker's feelings which mentioned by (30%) of them. idiomatic expressions depend on visible and invisible meaning due source language word is semantically complex as mentioned by (60%) and (58%) of them said that the source language concept is not lexicalized in the target language. idiomatic expressions increase hurdles in translation forensic language when (50%) of participants were stated that via both target language lacks of a superordinate and also through Non-equivalence word level means the target language has no equivalent for a word which occurs in the source text. legal translators choose idiomatic expressions in legal forensic language according to the differences in physical or interpersonal perspective that were said by (40%) of participants. The study ended in some recommendations: Increase student's awareness about prepositions that are generally polysemous and can be difficult to recognize in oral speech. Idiomatic expressions be judged according to both creativity and faithfulness to produce an idiomatic and readable TT thus creating an illusion of transparency. Recognize that idiomatic expressions are kind of meaning virtue of which speakers express, rather than describe their beliefs, attiytudes and feelings. Translators should understand equivalence types: denotative, connotative, textnormative, pragmatic and formal equivalence. Individual translators have to act ethically agent of social change and must interest with models of engagement and collective actions KEYWORDS: : Target text, idiomatic expressions. Forensic Language, Legal translation Published On: 19 December 2025 Available on: https://irijsh.com/ OVERVIEW An idiomatic expressions represent big important issues in legal translation forensic linguistic in many different pars to clarify a complex concepts related visible and invisible meaning and what most kind of semantics affects idiomatic expressions. Translation in forensic language play vital role in legal translation area from phonetics to sociolinguistics. This study investigated hurdles by idiomatic expressions in legal translation forensic linguistics involoved majority area of linguistics. STATEMENT OF RESEARCH PROBLEMS How can idiomatic expressions affect legal translation in forensic linguistics? Research questions 1/ What is the role of idiomatic expressions in clarifying legal forensic language? 2/ Why is translation in legal forensic language concerned idiomatic expressions? 3/ How can idiomatic expressions depend on visible and invisible meaning? Hurdles Posed by Idiomatic Expressions Translating Legal Forensic Language 188 Volume 02 Issue 12 December 2025 Corresponding Author: Khalda Abdelrhim Osman Mohmed 4/ What are the most important idiomatic expressions in increase hurdles in translation forensic language? 5/ To what extent legal translators choose idiomatic expressions in use legal forensic language? Research hypothesizes 1/An idiomatic expressions have a great role in clarifying legal forensic language. 2/ There are many reasons to make legal translation in forensic linguistics necessary. 3/ An idiomatic expression don’t depend on visible and invisible meaning. 4/All idiomatic expressions are increasing hurdles in translation forensic language. 5/ legal translators don't choose appropriately idiomatic expressions in use legal forensic language. Research objectives 1/ To understand the great role of idiomatic expressions in clarifying legal forensic language. 2/ To identify accurate reasons to make legal translation in forensic linguistics necessary. 3/ To build up relationships between idiomatic expressions with visible and invisible meaning. 4/ To arrange gradually which idiomatic expressions are increasing more hurdles in translation forensic language. 5/ To create basic rules for legal translators to choose the idiomatic expressions in use legal forensic language. Research importance Forensic language always has strong tools to structure and serve many parts in legal translation issues because it builds solid ground from phonetics to sociolinguistics so that idiomatic expressions posed some difficulties in differences between intercultural, language environments, invisible meaning. This study will divide these factors and how to make accurate meaning among them to facilitate better understanding of idiomatic expressions throughout legal translation in forensic language. LITERATURE FRAMEWORK The concept of translation: 1/ The process of translation between two different written languages involves the changing of an original written text (the source text or ST) in the original verbal language (the source language or SL) into written text (the target text or TT) in a different verbal language (the target language or TL). 2/ The concept of equivalence: The concept of equivalence, centre around obligatory grammatical lexical forms: 'language differ essentially in what they must convey and not in what they may convey' . Examples of differences are easy to find. They occur at: a/ the level of gender. b/ the level of aspect. c/the level of semantic fields, such askinship terms. The absence of a word in a language does not mean that a concept cannot be perceived someone from a hot climate can be shown slush and snow and can notice the difference. Full linguistic relatively would mean that translation was impossible, but of course translation does occur in all sorts of different contexts and language pairs. 3/ Impossible Worlds Because truth in a possible world is not the same as truth in the real world, possible worlds do not have to follow the laws of nature. Stories and poems can contain hobbits, fairies, and waist-coated rabbits, they can describe other galaxies and future times. We have looked only at text worlds that do not differ in their physical aspects from the real world, and have seen how a narrators furnish these worlds with believable objects and characters. (H.D. Adamson 2019) Idiomatic expression concept: 4/ An idiomatic may be as expressions with a particular meaning that is different from the meanings of each word on its own. The semantic relations between words in idiomatic expressions may be illogical to varying degrees. Idioms can not be paraphrased. Legal translation in forensic linguistic: 5/ Institutional talk is characterized by Drew and Heritage (1992: 22) as having: 16 The language of the legal process 1/ an orientation to core goals, tasks or identity conventionally associated with the institution – ‘goal orientations’; constraints on ‘allowable contributions’; 2/ specifi c ‘inferential frameworks’ in the context (Levinson 1979: 72 refers to these as 3/ ‘inferential schemata’). This means that the institutional members of legal conversations – police of (Malcom. C and Alison J. 2007) Hurdles Posed by Idiomatic Expressions Translating Legal Forensic Language 189 Volume 02 Issue 12 December 2025 Corresponding Author: Khalda Abdelrhim Osman Mohmed 6/ Cultural theory: In order to assess the significance of the data, to analyses the norms. Norms my be in the first instance linguistic or literary, but they will also include a diverse range of domestic values, beliefs, and social representations which carry ideological force in serving the interest of specific groups. And they are always housed in the social institutions where translations are produced and enlisted in cultural and political agenda. (Venuti 1998). RESEARCH LIMITS There are many levels of difficulty that may pose legal translation and forensic language by idiomatic expressions. The study was conducted at Sudan University of Science and Technology – College of Languages – English Language department – Students' Master Translation Program in Khartoum. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The study adopted two methods descriptive and analytical, and selected stratified random sample of 50 students of the English Language department, students' translation program at Sudan University of Science and Technology, in march 2022. The researcher used analytical methods to transfer qualitative data to numerical figures. The data was collected through a questionnaire after they had studied semester one by courses to enable them to evaluate the hurdles posed idiomatic expressions in legal translation forensic linguistic. Statistical analysis represents by percentages, frequency, tables, figures. Graphs and charts, RESULTS &DISCUSSIONS Statement (1) some of the hurdles encumbering legal translators are typical cases of: Propositional vs. Expressive meaning Table (1) Option Frequency Percentage % Strongly agree 8 16% Agree 9 18% Neutral 8 16% Strongly disagree 13 26% Disagree 12 24% Total 50 100% From the above table No (1) and figure No (1) It is clear that there are (8) persons in the study's sample with percentage (16%) strongly agreed with statement " Propositional vs. Expressive meaning. There are (9) persons with percentage (18%) agreed with that, and (8) persons with percentage (16%) were not sure that, and (13) persons with percentage (26%) disagreed. and (12) persons with (25%) are strongly disagree. some of the hurdles encumbering legal translators are typical cases of: Propositional vs. Expressive meaning As known as prepositions vs expressive meaning has many problems to legal translation forensic language as mentioned by 17 strongly agree and agree with percentage (34%)of participants that appears above, neither agree nor disagree (16%) Then the participants said disagree and strongly disagree by 25 with percentage (50%). (1) This study revealed that half (34%) of participants don't have any information about hurdles encumbering legal translators are typical cases of: Propositional vs. Expressive meaning. As (Koffi, 2010) said that ''in order to determine many factors contribute prepositions more notoriously in English language as follows ''prepositions are generally polysemous ''polysemy is ''semantic characteristic of words that have multiple meanings. Also the majority of prepositions in English have a variety of meanings depending on context. Then English has 60 to 70 prepositions a higher number than most other languages''. Strongly agree Agree Neutral Strongly disagree Disagree 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Hurdles Posed by Idiomatic Expressions Translating Legal Forensic Language 190 Volume 02 Issue 12 December 2025 Corresponding Author: Khalda Abdelrhim Osman Mohmed (2) Lam (2009) points out prepositions can be difficult to recognize, particularly in oral speech, because they typically contain very view syllables. Many English prepositions are monosyllabic, such as on, for, or to, so language learners cannot able to understand prepositions in rapid or in casual speech. Moreover, the use of prepositions in context varies greatly from one language to another, often causing negative syntactic transfer. The same preposions can carry vastly different meaning in various languages. If learners do make ''assumptions of semantic equivalence between the first and second languages''it often results in prepositional errors. (3) Expressive meaning relates to the speaker's feelings or attitude rather than to what words and utterances refer to. Moreover, the same attitude or evaluation may be expressed in two words or utterances in widely different degree of force fullness. Words which contribute solely to expressive meaning can be removed from an utterance without affecting its information content. (4) When a translation is described as 'inaccurate' it is often the prepositional meaning that is being called in question, (5) Expressive meaning cannot be judged as true or false this is because expressive meaning relates to the speaker's feelings or attitude rather than to what words and utterances refer to. ( quizlet.com) Statement No. (2) Evoked meaning arises from dialect and register variation. Table (2) Option Frequency Percentage % Strongly agree 8 16% Agree 9 18% Neutral 8 16% Strongly disagree 13 26% Disagree 12 24% Total 50 100% As known as evoked meaning arises from dialect and register variation. has many problems to legal translation forensic language as mentioned by 17 strongly agree and agree with percentage (34%)of participants that appears above, neither agree nor disagree (16%) Then the participants said disagree and strongly disagree by 25 with percentage (50%). This study explains that 50% of participants disagree and strongly disagree of above issue due they need to understand more about it, when Maricel .(2016) mentioned that the transfer of evoked meaning was further linked to two general criteria for meaning translation quality, also translations be judged according to both creativity and faithfulness and criticizes exclusively aesthetic or creative quality assessments of translations. Statement (3) Expressive meaning relates to the speaker's feelings or attitude rather than to what words and utterances refer to. Table (3) Option Frequency Percentage % Strongly agree 7 14% Agree 8 16% Neutral 12 24% Strongly disagree 13 26% Disagree 10 40% Total 50 20% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Strongly agree Agree Neutral Strongly disagree Disagree Hurdles Posed by Idiomatic Expressions Translating Legal Forensic Language 191 Volume 02 Issue 12 December 2025 Corresponding Author: Khalda Abdelrhim Osman Mohmed As known as Expressive meaning relates to the speaker's feelings or attitude rather than to what words and utterances refer to, has many problems to legal translation forensic language as mentioned by 15 strongly agree and agree with percentage (30%)of participants that appears above, neither agree nor disagree mentioned by (12) with percentage (24%) Then the participants said disagree and strongly disagree by 23 with percentage (46%). 1/ Expressive means from of language in phonetic – morphological – word-building lexical, phraseological, syntactical as a system or logical or emotional intersification of the utterance. This kind of meaning that such words convey, which Lyons(1995) defines as '' the kind of meaning by virtue of which speakers express, rather than describe, their beliefs, a ttitudes and feeling '' Expressive meaning is different from descriptive meaning'' 2/ A term used to describe something that has to do with conveying or showing an idea or feeling. 3/ This term describes something that is used to communicate or portray a specific idea or concept. How to ''expressive '' in a sentence a/ The contact contained an expressive clause that clearly stated the obligations of the parties involved. b/ The lawyer's expressive argument in favor helped the jury see the case from a different perspective. c/ The testimony was so expressive that it effectively conveyed the emotional distress the witness experienced. (Justia-2025. Justia Connect legal portal company) Statement (4) Presupposed meaning arises from co-occurrence restrictions, that restrictions on what other words or expressions we expect to see before or after a particular lexical unit Table (4) Option Frequency Percentage % Strongly agree 10 20% Agree 9 18% Neutral 7 14% Strongly disagree 14 28% Disagree 10 20% Total 50 100% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Strongly agree Agree Neutral Strongly disagree Disagree 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Strongly agree Agree Neutral Strongly disagree Disagree Hurdles Posed by Idiomatic Expressions Translating Legal Forensic Language 192 Volume 02 Issue 12 December 2025 Corresponding Author: Khalda Abdelrhim Osman Mohmed This table no (4) shows that, presupposed meaning arises from co-occurrence restrictions, that restrictions on what other words or expressions we expect to see before or after a particular lexical unit, it has many problems to legal translation forensic language as mentioned by 19 strongly agree and agree with percentage (28%)of participants that appears above, neither agree nor disagree mentioned by (7) with percentage (14%) Then the participants said disagree and strongly disagree by 24 with percentage (48%). Presupposed meaning is the implicit, context-dependent meaning of a word or expression that arises from the expected cooccurrence of words, known as co-occurrence restrictions. These restrictions are of two types: 1/ Selectional restrictions : these are a function of prepositional meaning of a word, we expect a human subject for the adjective studious and an inanimate one for geometrical. Selectional restrictions are deliberately violated in the case figurative language but are otherwise strictly observed. 2/ Collocational restrictions: These are semantically arbitrary restrictions which do not follow logically from the prepositional of a word. (The Open University: https;//www.open.edu.) Statement (5) Non-equivalence at word level means that the target language has no direct equivalent for a word which occurs in the source text. Table (5) Option Frequency Percentage % Strongly agree 12 24% Agree 13 26% Neutral 9 18% Strongly disagree 10 20% Disagree 6 12% Total 50 100% This table no (5) shows that, Non-equivalence at word level means that the target language has no direct equivalent for a word which occurs in the source text. It has many problems to legal translation forensic language as mentioned by 25 strongly agree and agree with percentage (50%)of participants that appears above, neither agree nor disagree mentioned by (9) with percentage (18%) Then the participants said disagree and strongly disagree by 16with percentage (32%). 1/ Npn-equivalence at word level means the target language has no direct equivalence for a word which occurs in source language. The type and level of difficulty posed can vary tremendously depending on the nature of non-equivalence. 'Equivalent effects ' has been invoked since the 1960 for translation and interpretating like, both with regard to the cognitive and result of the processthat is, comprehension by the target audienceand with regard to the emotive and pragmatic impact of the target text at the interpersonal level. In either dimension, tough, the empirical research base is rather tenuous, with most work having been done in the field signed language interpreting (Framz Pochhacker. 2016) 2/ The abilities in equivalence are indicative of competence in translation but, the question still remains to what exactly has to be equivalent. (Hatim, B. and J. Munday 2004) stated that '' differentiates five types of equivalence relations constrained in what is know as double linkage, by the source translation on the other hand and by the communicative conditions of the receiver on the other. These equivalence types are: (a) Denotative equivalence: related to equivalence of the extralinguistic content of a text. Other literature, says Koller calls this content invariance, 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Strongly agree Agree Neutral Strongly disagree Disagree Hurdles Posed by Idiomatic Expressions Translating Legal Forensic Language 193 Volume 02 Issue 12 December 2025 Corresponding Author: Khalda Abdelrhim Osman Mohmed (b) Connotative equivalence related to lexical choices, especially between near-synonyms, Koller considers this types of equivalence to be referred to by other as '' stylistic equivalence'' (c) Textnormative equivalence: related to text types with different kinds of texts behaving in different ways. (d) Pragmatic equivalence: or communicative equivalence is oriented towards the receiver of the text or message. (e) Formal equivalence: which is related to the form and aesthetics of the text, includes wordplays and the individual stylistic features of the source translation. It is referred to by others as '' expressive equivalence'' and should not be confused with ' formal equivalence'. Statement (6) Culture-specific concepts Table (6) Option Frequency Percentage % Strongly agree 7 14% Agree 9 18% Neutral 11 22% Strongly disagree 12 24% Disagree 11 22% Total 50 100% Table no (6) shows that, Culture-specific concepts contributes in difficulties to legal translation forensic language in idiomatic expressions. It has many problems to legal translation forensic language as mentioned by 16 strongly agree and agree with percentage (32%)of participants that appears above, neither agree nor disagree mentioned by (11) with percentage (22%) Then the participants said disagree and strongly disagree by 23 with percentage (46%). (Venuti 2008) sees this invisibility as typically being produced: (a)by the way translators themselves tend to translate 'fluently' into English, to produce an idiomatic and readable TT (target text) thus creating an 'illusion of transparency'. (b) by the way the translated texts are typically read in the target culture: A translated text, whether prose or poetry, fiction or nonfiction, is judged acceptable by most, reviewers, publishers, and readers when it reads fluently, when the absence of any linguistic or stylistic peculiarities makes it seem transparent, given the appearance that it reflects the foreign writer's personality or intention or the essential meaning of the foreign textthe appearance, in other words, that the translation is not in fact a translation, but the 'original'. Statement (7) Table (7) The source-language concept is not lexicalized in the target language Variables Frequency Percent% strongly agree 9 18 Agree 20 40 Neutral 8 16 Disagree 10 20 strongly disagree 3 6 Total 50 100.0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Strongly agree Agree Neutral Strongly disagree Disagree Hurdles Posed by Idiomatic Expressions Translating Legal Forensic Language 194 Volume 02 Issue 12 December 2025 Corresponding Author: Khalda Abdelrhim Osman Mohmed Table no (7) shows that, The source-language concept is not lexicalized in the target language which makes difficulties to legal translation forensic language in idiomatic expressions. It has many problems to legal translation forensic language as mentioned by 29 strongly agree and agree with percentage (58%)of participants that appears above, neither agree nor disagree mentioned by (8) with percentage (16%) Then the participants said disagree and strongly disagree by 13 with percentage (26%). The central and the most theory laden issue in the examination of the interpreter's product is the nature of the relationship between the source text and its target –language rendition. Scholar's of written translation have traditionally discussed this '' translational relation'' in the terms of 'equivalence '. (Munday 2001) mentioned that in contrast, have sought to capture the ideal standard for the interpreter's translational product with notions like accuracy – completeness and fidelity. For success of the translation depends on achieving equivalent effect or response. It is one of the four basic requirements of a translation which are: a/ making sense b/ conveying the spirit and manner of the original c/ having a natural and easy form of expression d/ producing a similar response Statement (8) The source-language word is semantically complex Table (8) Table no (8) shows that, The source-language word is semantically complex which makes difficulties to legal translation forensic language in idiomatic expressions. 0 5 10 15 20 25 Strongly agree Agree Neutral Strongly disagree Disagree Strongly agree Agree Neutral Strongly disagree Disagree Variables Frequency Percent% strongly agree 20 40 agree 10 20 neutral 10 20 disagree 6 12 strongly disagree 4 8 Total 30 100.0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Hurdles Posed by Idiomatic Expressions Translating Legal Forensic Language 195 Volume 02 Issue 12 December 2025 Corresponding Author: Khalda Abdelrhim Osman Mohmed It has many problems to legal translation forensic language as mentioned by 30 strongly agree and agree with percentage (60%)of participants that appears above, neither agree nor disagree mentioned by (10) with percentage (20%) Then the participants said disagree and strongly disagree by 10 with percentage (20%). The challenges for the composition of meaning in more complex syntactic constructions than those have we related so far. The framework systematically fails in analyzing meaning relations between expressions that are not adjacent to each other. Forms and meanings are paired together in integrative linguistic resources called linguistic signs.(Yoad Winter. 2016) Statement (9) The source and target languages make different distinctions in meaning Table (9) Option Frequency Percentage % Strongly agree 7 14% Agree 10 20% Neutral 9 18% Strongly disagree 12 24% Disagree 12 24% Total 50 100% Table no (9) shows that The source and target languages make different distinctions in meaning makes difficulties to legal translation forensic language in idiomatic expressions. It has many problems to legal translation forensic language as mentioned by 17 strongly agree and agree with percentage (34%)of participants that appears above, neither agree nor disagree mentioned by (9) with percentage (18%) Then the participants said disagree and strongly disagree by 24 with percentage (48%). John Dryden whose brief description of the translation process would have enormous impact subsequent translation theory and practice. In 1980, he reduces all translation to three categories a/ metaphrase: word by word and line by line 'translation which sponds to literal translation' b/ paraphrase: ' translation with latitude, where the auther is kept in view by the translator, so answer to be lost, but his works are not strictly followed as his sense, this involves changing whole phrase and more less corresponds to faithful or sense – for sense translation. c/ imitation: for saking both words and sense ; this corresponds to very free translation and more or less what today might be understood as adaptation.(Jeremy Munday (2016) Statement (10) The target language lacks a superordinate Table (10) Option Frequency Percentage % Strongly agree 12 24% Agree 13 26% Neutral 9 18% Strongly disagree 10 20% Disagree 6 12% Total 50 100% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Strongly agree Agree Neutral Strongly disagree Disagree