ArticleTranslation Theories and Skills http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/tfll.2025.08.006
Differential Linguistic Realization: A Corpus-based Analysis of Trade Remedy Provisions in Chinese, Mongolian, and Russian Tariff Legislation
Mei Wen
School of Foreign Languages, Inner Mongolia University of Finance and Economics, Hohhot 010070, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, China.
*Corresponding author: Mei Wen
This paper is granted by Research on the Role of Business English Education in Promoting Regional Development and International Exchange in Inner Mongolia (Grant No.: NGJGH2024324) which is Research Project of Education Science in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region during the 14th Five Year Plan.
Published: September 26,2025
Abstract
This corpus-based study examines differential linguistic realizations of trade remedy provisions in Chinese, Mongolian, and Russian tariff legislation, addressing a critical gap in comparative legal linguistics. Leveraging lexical diversity metrics (STTR), part-of-speech analysis, collocation profiling, and syntactic complexity measures, we identify systematic divergences rooted in distinct legal traditions (civil law/hybrid) and language families (Sinitic/Mongolic/Slavic). Key findings reveal: Mongolian texts exhibit the highest lexical diversity (STTR 25.69%) and longest sentences (mean 38.91 words), reflecting its hybrid lexicon blending Sinitic and Slavic influences. Chinese prioritizes concision (STTR 24.75%) with concentrated modality (e.g., "may" at 0.86%, dispersion 0.27), signaling administrative flexibility. Russian balances lexical density (STTR 24.88%) with syntactic brevity (mean 12.93 words) and institutional nominalizations (e.g., "federal customs authority"). Crucially, obligation markers diverge significantly—Mongolian dominates deontic "shall" (2.23%; dispersion 0.93), while Chinese favors specification verbs ("specified": 0.55%). Collocations expose jurisdiction-specific drafting conventions: Chinese ties discretion to ministries ("ministry of commerce may"), Russian emphasizes procedural formalism, and Mongolian integrates referential precision ("specified in law"). The absence of adverbial "significantly" in Mongolian/Russian versus Chinese usage further highlights phrasing disparities. These variations impede terminological interoperability in the China-Mongolia-Russia Economic Corridor, providing actionable insights for legal translators and policymakers to mitigate cross-jurisdictional compliance risks.
Keywords
Corpus-based analysis; Trade remedy provisions; Comparative legal linguistics
References
Annaer, & Dahubaiyila. (2024). Corpus-based analysis of lexical features of Mongolian language policy text. In Chinese Lexical Semantics: CLSW 2023 (pp. 331-341). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 14515. Springer.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford University Press.
Bhatia, V. K., Engberg, J., Gotti, M., & Heller, D. (2005). Vagueness in normative texts. Peter Lang.
Biel, Ł. (2014). Lost in the Eurofog: The textual fit of translated law. Peter Lang.
Glanert, S. (2008). Speaking language to law: The case of Europe. Legal Studies, 28(2), 161-171.
Šarčević, S. (1997). New approach to legal translation. Kluwer Law International.
Williams, C. (2009). Legal English and the "modal revolution". Modality in English: Theory and Description, edited by Raphael Salkie, Pierre Busuttil and Johan van der Auwera, Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton, 2009, pp. 199-210.
Wright, D. (2025). Corpus approaches to discourse in forensic and legal contexts. Routledge.
Yanli Gao& Zhimeng Zhu. (2023). A study on the translation of Chinese-English legal texts based on legal and cultural differences. Academic Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences, 6(9), 79-84.
Copyright
© 2025 by the author(s).
This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) license, which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not modified or adapted.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
How to cite this paper
Differential Linguistic Realization: A Corpus-based Analysis of Trade Remedy Provisions in Chinese, Mongolian, and Russian Tariff Legislation
How to cite this paper: Mei Wen. (2025). Differential Linguistic Realization: A Corpus-based Analysis of Trade Remedy Provisions in Chinese, Mongolian, and Russian Tariff Legislation. Translation and Foreign Language Learning, 1(1), 39-45.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/tfll.2025.08.006