This research and analysis work aims to study the heterogeneity within, first, the language used by the European Union and, secondly, by the English and Italian law.
The object of study taken into consideration is the European Directive 2009/125/EC of the council of 21st October 2009 and its transposition laws in Italy. The directive on examination concerns the design of environmentally sound energy-related products.
What is important to consider is the fact that the directive is likely to recreate the repealed directive 2005/32. This, however, is not completely disrupted, but needs to include changes which would not repeal the majority of the legislative decrees previously issued in Italy.
As it is not uncommon for the criticism that the European Community would have made further complicating factor in the lives of those who are liable to respect the law, we can say that now the use of a idiolect featuring community activities in each of the 23 official languages is really common.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. NOTES ON COMMUNITY LAW
1.1 Historical background of the European Union
1.1.2 The “Community law” and its institutions
1.1.3 The role of institutions in shaping standards
1.2 The Community legislative instruments
1.2.1 Regulations, decisions, recommendations and opinions
1.2.2 The Directive
1.3 The “EU enlargement" process
2. MULTILINGUALISM AND TRANSLATION
2.1 The reasons for multilingualism in the European institutions
2.1.1 Relations between multilingualism and translation
2.1.2 Modes of interpretation
2.2 Role of Legal Translator
2.2.1 From translator, text producer, co-drafter
2.2.2 The co-drafting: risks of ambiguity
3. LINGUISTIC ASPECTS OF THE DIR. 2009/125/EC AND DIR. 2005/32/EC AND OF ITS IMPLEMENTATION IN ITALY
3.1 Overview
3.1.1 Recasting: aspects of the content
3.1.1.2 Mode of action
3.1.1.3 Scope
3.1.1.4 The Dir. 2005/32/EC and 2009/125/EC in comparison
3.1.2 The Community Law
3.1.3 The report of the Community legislation with the Constitution
3.1.4 Italy under implementation
4. CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING MACROLINGUISTIC ANALYSIS
4.1 The semiotic dimension of the Directives
4.1.1 The intertextuality
4.1.1.1 The intertextuality in Italian decrees
4.1.2 The textual deictic
4.1.3 The superstructure of the decrees of the Italian and subdivisions of
4.2 Analysis microlinguistic
4.2.1 Lexical
4.2.1.1 "Input" or "input" of energy?
4.2.2 Deontic Constructs
4.2.3 The requirement in the legislative texts
CLOSING THOUGHTS
BIBLIOGRAPHY
REFERENCES
a) Collection of websites
b) Sources of law
c) Decisions
APPENDIX
-
-
-
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X.