23 there is no one-to-one correspondence between signs across language, full
semantic meaning of the words can still be expressed by that principle. Untranslatabilities can be a source of information streams in translation.
Nida 1959 states that non-correspondence of grammatical and lexical categories, as the main cause of untranslatabilities, is the main source of information loss and
gain in translation when SL category lacks information which is obligatory expressed in the corresponding TL category. Furthermore, untranslatabilities can
also be a source of information streams in translating between different cultures since language is an integral part of culture. Based on that situation, Snell-Hornby
1988: 42 suggests that a translator needs not only proficiency in two languages, but also be at home in those two cultures.
e. Translation Equivalence
Equivalence is not the same with correspondence, although those terms have slight similarities. Correspondence happens in comparing two language
systems and describing differences and similarities contrastively. While equivalence happens when there are equivalent items in specific ST-TT pairs and
contexts Koller, 1979, in Munday, 2008: 47. Popovic 1976 explains further about equivalence as he defines four types of equivalence in Bardenstein, 2005:
1 Linguistic equivalence, where there is homogeneity on the linguistic level of both SL and TL texts, i.e. word for word translation.
2 Paradigmatic equivalence, where there is equivalence of ‘the elements of paradigmatic expressive axes, i.e. the elements of grammar.
24 3 Stylistic syntacmatic equivalence, where there is ‘functional equivalence of
elements in both original and translation aiming at an expressive identity with an invariant of identical meaning’.
4 Textual syntagmatic equivalence, where there is equivalence of the syntagmatic structuring of a text, i.e. equivalence of form and shape.
Nida 1964:162-165 distinguishes two types of equivalences, formal and dynamic. Formal equivalence ‘focuses attention on the message itself, in both
form and content’. The concern of this type is such correspondences as poetry to poetry, sentence to sentence, and concept to concept. Dynamic equivalence, on the
other hand, is based on the principle of equivalence effect, where the relationship between the receiver and message should be the same as that between the original
receivers and the SL message.
2. Culture-specific Terms
Newmark 1988: 94 defines culture as “the way of life and its manifestations that are peculiar to a community that uses a particular language as
its means of expression.” Furthermore, he distinguishes languages into ‘cultural’, ‘universal’, and ‘personal’ language. However, the more specific a language
becomes for natural phenomena e.g., flora and fauna the more it becomes embedded in cultural features, and therefore creates translation problems. Those
‘cultural’ words is later mentioned as culture-specific terms. On the other hand, Baker 1992: 21 defines culture-specific items as abstract and concrete concepts
in the ST which are totally unknown in target culture. Due to its unknown state in target culture, there are some factors that influence translator’s choice of
25 procedures in translating culture-specific term to avoid mistranslation or
information loss. In translating culture-specific term, a translator must recognize those
cultural words initially. Newmark 1988: 95 states that “most cultural words are easy to detect” because they are particular-language-associated and cannot be
literally translated, however, “many cultural customs are described in ordinary language where literal translation would distort the meaning and a translation may
include an appropriate descriptive-functional equivalent.” Furthermore, he categorizes cultural words into five categories, namely, 1 ecology, 2 material
culture, 3 social culture, 4 organizations, ideas, customs, and also 5 gestures and habits 1988: 95-102.
a. Ecology
Newmark 1988: 96-97 states that geographical features can be normally distinguished from other cultural terms in that they are usually value-
free, politically and commercially. Newmark’s examples of this category are the local words for plains in many countries i.e., ‘prairies’, ‘steppes’, ‘tundras’,
‘pampas’, ‘savannahs’, ‘llampos’, ‘campos’, ‘paramos’, ‘bush’, ‘veld’ with strong elements of their local colours. Their familiarity is a function of the
importance and geographical or political proximity of their countries. These words is normally transferred, with the addition of a brief culture-free third term
or explanation where necessary in the text. Mostly the examples of this category are flora, fauna, winds, plains, hills. In On Foreign Shores, the example of
ecological culture-specific terms can be found in Darmanto Yatman’s Melintasi
