Functional Equivalence in the Translation of Legal Terms: Insights from Arabic and Azerbaijani

This paper examines functional equivalence as a guiding principle in legal translation, drawing on the foundational theories of Nida, Šarčević, and Trosborg. We focus on the challenging case of translating legal terminology between Arabic and Azerbaijani, two languages rooted in distinct legal cultures (Islamic/Sharia-influenced versus post-Soviet civil law). After defining functional equivalence and reviewing its theoretical underpinnings, we overview the respective legal systems and linguistic contexts. We then present a comparative analysis of key legal terms across civil, contract, criminal, and constitutional law, using examples drawn from statutes, codes, and contracts. For instance, Arabic عقد (ʿaqd, “contract”) aligns functionally with Azerbaijani müqavilə (“contract”), while Arabic قتل العمد (al-qatl al-ʿamd, “premeditated murder”) corresponds to Azerbaijani qəsdlə adam öldürmə (intentional homicide). These comparisons, summarized in illustrative tables, show how translators seek concepts in the target legal system that perform the same role as in the source system. We evaluate how functional equivalence promotes legal accuracy and cross-cultural clarity by preserving the function and effect of terms, rather than their literal words. Finally, we discuss pitfalls: literal translations can mislead (for example, rendering شريعة as simply “law” ignores its religious context), and functional equivalence has limits when no close counterpart exists. We suggest strategies such as explicitation, glossing, or hybrid approaches to address non-equivalence. Overall, functional equivalence remains a crucial but not exclusive tool for translators navigating the sociocultural gap between Arabic and Azerbaijani legal discourse.