What Is Private Law? Antonio Lordi Guido Alpa 9781594607905 Books
Download As PDF : What Is Private Law? Antonio Lordi Guido Alpa 9781594607905 Books
The Italian original of this book, Che cos è il diritto privato?, is widely recognized as an influential treatise on the basic methods of legal science, introduces the student to the main institutions and theories of Italian and European Private law, as well as to the basic ideas and principles related to the concept, function and purpose of Italian and European Private law. In translation, this book thus provides any reader with the perspective of the Italian student of law on the ideas that have shaped legal practice in Italy and on the continent of Europe. Its unique value lies in the fact that it is not a gloss, not secondary literature, not an interpretation and not a summary it is a direct, primary source made available to readers in the English language for the first time.
What Is Private Law? Antonio Lordi Guido Alpa 9781594607905 Books
The odds are against a translation working well when the translator works alone and is native only in the origin language, rather than the target -- as here, where the translator is native in Italian, but not in English. Unfortunately, this book doesn't beat those odds. The original (which I have not yet seen) probably is to blame for some issues, as well. Here are a few random examples:(a) Apropos of law relating to cohabiting unmarried couples: "There are basically two types of intervention: one that brings disadvantages the couple [sic] , and one that benefits them. ... The favorable kinds of intervention are ostensibly very rare and have largely taken place in recent years." (@70)
-- "Ostensibly" connotes that someone is making a claim or representation that is less than the whole truth, or even false. Is someone making such a representation about the "interventions" in this field? The more neutral "apparently" seems more appropriate in context. A preposition is missing, as well (_to_ the couple).
(b) "The proceedings of the case can be reconstructed by reading the reports by [various officers of the court] and the many commentaries produced by doctrine." (@132)
-- Commentaries produced by "doctrine" does not make much sense. Probably the original used the word "dottrina," which can also be translated by the word "scholars."
(c) A couple of lines later on the same page, here is our first information about the facts of description of the case, relating to the general topic of "damage from birth":
"The Court holds that: [(i)] the negligence attributable to the doctors and the laboratories in the execution of the contracts with the expectant mother had induced confidence in the accuracy of the findings and on [sic] her own immunity and had therefore prevented her from exercising her right to terminate her pregnancy in order to avoid giving birth to a handicapped child; ...."
-- It is the author's, not the translator's, fault that this is the first we are told of the facts of the case, without any prior context. The author is quoting from a decision of the notoriously oblique Cour de cassation in France, but nothing compelled him to present the information by that device. Nonetheless, read literally, this says that the negligence had induced confidence, which is difficult to comprehend, esp. since we don't know what negligence is being referred to. Should this have said that the doctors and laboratories *negligently induced* confidence, presumably in certain test results? Beats me.
(d) "In recent years the literature on fundamental rights has grown to huge proportions, almost resembling a long river proceeding slowly towards the estuary of universal recognition; and yet a close and careful reading of the most recent essays on the subject, avoiding temptations towards rhetoric, would convince us of the opposite." (@52)
-- It's hard to determine exactly which opposite is being referred to (opposite of huge? long? slowly? universal? or upriver instead of downriver?), and why one should feel tempted to rhetoricalize in this context (as if rivers and estuaries are not so rhetorical here).
(e) Apropos of the "eighteenth and seventeenth [sic] centuries": "One of the historically most consistent criteria in the classification of individuals was religious membership. The manifestation of religious membership symbols, seals and colors was then one of the most widely adopted practices in society, that *to our eyes* would not [sic] seem so terribly oppressive: the Jews, even in Renaissance and Enlightenment society, were obliged to wear clearly visible marks that would make them immediately distinguishable." (@62, emphasis added)
-- Whose is the mistake in this passage: the translator's, by inserting an inappropriate "not," or perhaps by mistranslating as "our" what should have been "their"? Or does the author sincerely believe that such discrimination would *not* seem "so terribly oppressive" to our modern-day eyes?
The translator is a practicing lawyer born and trained in Italy, and now working and teaching in the US. Because he obviously admired the original book and was ambitious enough to try to bring it to a broader audience, I can't entirely blame him for these problems, though he perhaps underestimated the challenges of the task he undertook. It seems to me, though, that the editors at Carolina Academic Press should not be cut such slack. How could they have let such a problematic manuscript make it into print in this condition? Didn't anyone there read it through? Authors and translators deserve more support from an editorial team.
A patient reader with no Italian but great hermeneutic skills might be able to get some valuable information from this book, which describes Italian law of tort, contract and family law in a style that is very terse even when it is intelligible, and sometimes mixes in decisions from France and elsewhere. This book wasn't so apposite for my teaching needs, but if I'm ever tempted to return to it, I'll either go straight to the original or first check out some of its competition available in Italian. If you're interested in civil legal systems more generally, there are easier ways to learn about them, such as some good surveys of French law and German law from Oxford U Press.
Product details
|
Tags : What Is Private Law? [Antonio Lordi, Guido Alpa] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The Italian original of this book, Che cos è il diritto privato?, is widely recognized as an influential treatise on the basic methods of legal science,Antonio Lordi, Guido Alpa,What Is Private Law?,Carolina Academic Press,1594607907,LAW016000,Comparative,Civil law.,Nonfiction General,Civil law,Law,Law Comparative
People also read other books :
- Dating Advice for Women The Shy Gal’s Dating Success Guide to Meeting Men Overcoming Social Anxiety and Building SelfConfidence eBook Emily Devonshire
- The Wildwater Walking Club Back on Track Book 2 of The Wildwater Walking Club series Volume 2 9781942671206 Claire Cook Books
- Assassins Wall edition by Amanda Dubin Literature Fiction eBooks
- UNCLE TOM'S CABIN[Illustrated] edition by Harriet Stowe Michael He Literature Fiction eBooks
- Gabriel [Marius Brothers 7] Siren Publishing Classic ManLove edition by Joyee Flynn Literature Fiction eBooks
What Is Private Law? Antonio Lordi Guido Alpa 9781594607905 Books Reviews
The odds are against a translation working well when the translator works alone and is native only in the origin language, rather than the target -- as here, where the translator is native in Italian, but not in English. Unfortunately, this book doesn't beat those odds. The original (which I have not yet seen) probably is to blame for some issues, as well. Here are a few random examples
(a) Apropos of law relating to cohabiting unmarried couples "There are basically two types of intervention one that brings disadvantages the couple [sic] , and one that benefits them. ... The favorable kinds of intervention are ostensibly very rare and have largely taken place in recent years." (@70)
-- "Ostensibly" connotes that someone is making a claim or representation that is less than the whole truth, or even false. Is someone making such a representation about the "interventions" in this field? The more neutral "apparently" seems more appropriate in context. A preposition is missing, as well (_to_ the couple).
(b) "The proceedings of the case can be reconstructed by reading the reports by [various officers of the court] and the many commentaries produced by doctrine." (@132)
-- Commentaries produced by "doctrine" does not make much sense. Probably the original used the word "dottrina," which can also be translated by the word "scholars."
(c) A couple of lines later on the same page, here is our first information about the facts of description of the case, relating to the general topic of "damage from birth"
"The Court holds that [(i)] the negligence attributable to the doctors and the laboratories in the execution of the contracts with the expectant mother had induced confidence in the accuracy of the findings and on [sic] her own immunity and had therefore prevented her from exercising her right to terminate her pregnancy in order to avoid giving birth to a handicapped child; ...."
-- It is the author's, not the translator's, fault that this is the first we are told of the facts of the case, without any prior context. The author is quoting from a decision of the notoriously oblique Cour de cassation in France, but nothing compelled him to present the information by that device. Nonetheless, read literally, this says that the negligence had induced confidence, which is difficult to comprehend, esp. since we don't know what negligence is being referred to. Should this have said that the doctors and laboratories *negligently induced* confidence, presumably in certain test results? Beats me.
(d) "In recent years the literature on fundamental rights has grown to huge proportions, almost resembling a long river proceeding slowly towards the estuary of universal recognition; and yet a close and careful reading of the most recent essays on the subject, avoiding temptations towards rhetoric, would convince us of the opposite." (@52)
-- It's hard to determine exactly which opposite is being referred to (opposite of huge? long? slowly? universal? or upriver instead of downriver?), and why one should feel tempted to rhetoricalize in this context (as if rivers and estuaries are not so rhetorical here).
(e) Apropos of the "eighteenth and seventeenth [sic] centuries" "One of the historically most consistent criteria in the classification of individuals was religious membership. The manifestation of religious membership symbols, seals and colors was then one of the most widely adopted practices in society, that *to our eyes* would not [sic] seem so terribly oppressive the Jews, even in Renaissance and Enlightenment society, were obliged to wear clearly visible marks that would make them immediately distinguishable." (@62, emphasis added)
-- Whose is the mistake in this passage the translator's, by inserting an inappropriate "not," or perhaps by mistranslating as "our" what should have been "their"? Or does the author sincerely believe that such discrimination would *not* seem "so terribly oppressive" to our modern-day eyes?
The translator is a practicing lawyer born and trained in Italy, and now working and teaching in the US. Because he obviously admired the original book and was ambitious enough to try to bring it to a broader audience, I can't entirely blame him for these problems, though he perhaps underestimated the challenges of the task he undertook. It seems to me, though, that the editors at Carolina Academic Press should not be cut such slack. How could they have let such a problematic manuscript make it into print in this condition? Didn't anyone there read it through? Authors and translators deserve more support from an editorial team.
A patient reader with no Italian but great hermeneutic skills might be able to get some valuable information from this book, which describes Italian law of tort, contract and family law in a style that is very terse even when it is intelligible, and sometimes mixes in decisions from France and elsewhere. This book wasn't so apposite for my teaching needs, but if I'm ever tempted to return to it, I'll either go straight to the original or first check out some of its competition available in Italian. If you're interested in civil legal systems more generally, there are easier ways to learn about them, such as some good surveys of French law and German law from Oxford U Press.
0 Response to "[KWO]⋙ Descargar Free What Is Private Law? Antonio Lordi Guido Alpa 9781594607905 Books"
Post a Comment