The changes in the conceptual meanings of Latin borrowings in French legal terminology
Pages: 93-100 | DOI: 10.37724/RSU.2026.77.2.010 | EDN: YBXNOA | UDK: 811.133
Muravev Y.A.
Patrice Lumumba Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia
Abstract
The paper examines the comparative etymology of several Latin-derived terms in modern legal French associated with Roman law institutions. The article aims to establish the phonetic, word-formation, lexical, syntactic, and semantic derivations of these legal terms, to identify their underlying semantic structure in French legal language, and to establish how their modern conceptual meanings have changed compared to authentic Latin terms of Roman law. The research methodology draws on a combination of empirical and theoretical research methods in the field of Romance philology: comparative linguistics, semantics, semiotics, as well as contrastive and corpus linguistics. Comparative law methodology was also used as an additional method. The novelty of the study lies in the fact that its interdisciplinary approach, combining legal history and linguistics, allows for a deeper understanding of the significance of key institutions and important legal concepts still used in modern French law. The results of terminological research in a pair of closely related Romance languages (Latin and French) can be used for lexicography, optimization of machine translation, and the development of computer legal linguistics (legal tech), as well as for educational and methodological purposes in higher education.
Keywords: legal French, semantics, etymology, Roman law, comparative law, comparative linguistics, French law, legal linguistics, Romance philology, Latin language, terminology
Funding:
none
References
1. Ван Геннеп А. «Обряды перехода». — М.: «Восточная литература» РАН, 1999. — 198 с.
2. Гай. «Институции». — М.: Юристъ, 1997. — 422 с.
3. Гак В. Г. «О контрастивной лингвистике» // Контрастивная лингвистика. Вып. XXV / сост. В. П. Нерознак, В. Г. Гак. — М.: Прогресс, 1989. — 517-528 сс.
4. Давид Р., Жоффре Спинози К. «Основные правовые системы современности». — М.: Международные отношения, 1996. — 456 с.
5. Дождев Д. В. «Римское частное право». — М.: Инфра М: НОРМА, 1996. — 784 с.
6. Дюмезиль Ж. «Религия Древнего Рима». — СПб.: Квадривиум, 2018. — 896 с.
7. Кофанов Л. Л. «Жреческие коллегии в Раннем Риме». — М.: Наука, 2001. — 328 с.
8. Леже Р. «Великие правовые системы современности». — М.: Волтерс Клувер, 2009. — 529 с.
9. Шайд Дж. Религия римлян. — М.: Новое издательство, 2006. — 280 с.
10. Debyser F. La linguistique contrastive et les interférences // Langue française. — 1975. — № 8. — Pp. 31–61. — URL : https://doi.org/10.3406/lfr.1970.5473(дата обращения01.02.2026).
11. France. (1804). Code civil des Français. In Legifrance. Secrétariat général du gouvernement. — URL : https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/texte_lc/LEGITEXT000006070721(дата обращения01.02.2026).
12. Gaudemet J. Les naissances du droit. — P.: Montchrestien, 2006. — 416 p.
13. Lado R. Linguistics across cultures: Applied linguistics for language teachers. — Ann Arbor: Presses de l’Université du Michigan, 1957. — 160 p.
14. Schiavone A. Ius: L’invention du droit en Occident. — P.: Belin, 2011. — 542 с.
15. Seoane A. Deux néologismes par glissement sémantique: quand l’euphémisme cristallise // La Linguistique. — 2016. — № 52 (2). Pp. 271–290. — URL : https://doi.org/10.3917/ling.522.0271 (дата обращения01.02.2026).
16. Thomas Y. Les opérations du droit. — P.: Gallimard, 2011. — 384 с.