22
CHAPTER III THE TRANSLATION METHOD AND MEANING
EQUIVALENT IN ENGLISH - INDONESIAN TRANSLATION
A. Data Description
In this chapter is presents analyzes of translation method and meaning equivalence. The writer tries to analyze the novel “In Control, Ms Wiz?”4
th
series by Terence Blacker as source text compares with the phrases, words, sentences,
and paragraphs in the novel Indonesia version Semua Terkendali, Mz Wiz? by Rosy L. Simamora as target text. And then, the writer also gives her opinion that is
related to both steps, that is analysis in English and Indonesia version to find out how the translation methods and meaning equivalence are used in both of the
novels.
B. Data Analysis
1. For the analysis, writer made reference to some indicators for method of
translation from Peter Newmark words, such as: Translation method given the emphasis on the source language:
a. The first method in the SL emphasis is word-for-word translation. This is
often demonstrated as interlinear translation, with the TL immediately
below the SL words. The SL word-order is preserved and the words
translated singly by their most common meanings, out of context. Cultural words are translated literally. The main use of word-for-word translation is
23
either to understand the mechanics of the source language or to construe a difficult text as a pre-translation process.
35
b. The second method is Literal translation. The SL grammatical constructions
are convened to their nearest TL equivalents but the lexical words are again translated singly, out of context. As a pre-translation process, this indicates
the problems to be solved.
36
c. The third method is faithful translation. The translator tries to translate the
meaning of the source text attempting to convey the writers intention. Yet, the translation keeps the grammar of the SL and the lexis that deviate the TL
norms.
37
d. The fourth method is semantic translation. Semantic translation is almost the
same as faithful translation. The differences are that semantic translation more flexible allowing the translators intuitive works based on the original
meaning, more accurate not keeping the SL grammar and the lexis that violate the TL norms, and has aesthetic value the beautiful and natural
sound than faithful translation.
38
Translation method give the emphasis on the target language: e.
The first is adaptation. This is the freest form of translation. It is used mainly for plays comedies and poetry; the themes, characters, plots are
usually preserved, the SL culture converted to the TL culture and the text rewritten. The deplorable practice of having a play or poem literally
35
Ibid., p. 46
36
Ibid., p. 46.
37
Ibid., p. 46.
38
Ibid., p. 46.
24
translated and then rewritten by an established dramatist or poet has produced many poor adaptations, but other adaptations have rescued period
plays.
39
f. The second is free translation. Free translation reproduces the matter
without the manner, or the content without the form of the original. Usually it is a paraphrase much longer than the original, a so-
called „intralingual translation, often prolix and pretentious, and not translation at all.
40
g. The third is idiomatic translation. Idiomatic translation reproduces the
„message of the original but tends to distort nuances of meaning by preferring colloquialisms and idioms where these do not exist in the
original.
41
h. The last is communicative translation. Communicative translation attempts
to render the exact contextual meaning of the original in such a way that both content and language are readily acceptable and comprehensible to the
readership.
42
2. For the analysis, writer made reference to some indicators for meaning
equivalence from Eugene A. Nida words, such as: a.
Formal correspondence consists of a target language item which represents the closest equivalent of a source language word or phrase. Nida and Taber
make it clear that there are not always formal equivalents between language pairs. They therefore suggest that these formal equivalents
39
Ibid., p. 46.
40
Ibid., p. 46.
41
Ibid., p. 46.
42
Ibid., p. 46.
25
should be used wherever possible if the translation aims at achieving formal rather than dynamic equivalence. The use of formal equivalents
might at times have serious implications in the TT since the translation will not be easily understood by the target audience. Nida and Taber
themselves assert that typically, formal correspondence distorts the grammatical and stylistic patterns of the receptor language, and hence
distorts the message, so as to cause the receptor to misunderstand or to labor unduly hard.
43
b. Dynamic equivalence is defined as a translation principle according to
which a translator seeks to translate the meaning of the original in such a way that the target language wording will trigger the same impact on the
TC audience as the original wording did upon the ST audience. They argue that frequently, the form of the original text is changed, but as long as the
change follows the rules of back transformation in the source language, of contextual consistency in the transfer, and of transformation in the
receptor.
44
In the data analysis the writer get the methods of text source language in novel “In Control, Ms Wiz?”4th series by Terence Blacker compares it with its
translation Semua Terkendali, Mz Wiz? by Rosy L. Simamora as of text target language. And then, she analysis the method of source language and target
language as a Communicative Translation
43
Eugene A. Nida and Charles R. Taber. The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden:E. J. Brill, 1982, p.201.
44
Ibid., p. 201.
26
Data 1.
SL: In the Children‟s corner, a group of five-years-olds were laughing at a story being read to them by their teacher. p.67
TL: Disudut buku anak, sekelompok anak berumur lima tahun tertawa mendengar kisah yang diceritakann guru mereka. p.5
To this paragraph the writer classified that the translator used communicative translation, but firstly the writer in this translation did the literal
translation method as a pre-translation process to indicates the problems to be solved, but after that the translator doing transposition to adjust according to the
words of the target language grammar. Because in the process of translation, the translator looking for the source language grammatical construction equivalent or
close to the target language. Like the words in data 1 above a group of five- years-olds were laughing at a story being read to them by their teacher. When
translated word for word then there is suatu kelompok dari lima-tahun-berumur pada menertawakan sebuah cerita yang dibaca kepada mereka oleh mereka guru.
So, source language is converted into its equivalent in the target language to be sekelompok anak berumur lima tahun tertawa mendengar kisah yang
diceritakann guru mereka in order to be understood by target audience. And that also was happening again in data 1. Besides, the translation its also using
dynamic equivalence because they argue that frequently, the form of the original text is changed, but as long as the change follows the rules of back transformation
in the source language.
27
Data 2.
SL: “If I tell you something, will you promise not to panick?”. p.117 TL: “Kalau aku memberitahu Anda sesuatu, maukah Anda berjanji tidak akan
panic?”. p.54 In this paragraph firstly the writer used word for word translation, because
this translation is considered the closest to the source language. In the beginning until the sentence the end no single word removable, all structured in place. Like
according to Peter Newmarks concept about word-for-word translation method , the words translated singly by their most common meanings, out of context to
understand the mechanics of the source language or to construe a difficult text as a pre-translation process. But all was not independent of communicative translation,
like in data 2. The words “If I tell you something, will you promise not to panick?” are structured in the source language is translated as close as possible to
the target language translation become “Kalau aku memberitahu Anda sesuatu, maukah Anda berjanji tidak akan panic?” so that both the content and the
language is accepted and understood by the reader. Because of that, the translation using dynamic equivalence because the form of the original text is can to changed,
but as long as the change follows the rules of back transformation in the source language, of contextual consistency in the transfer, and of transformation in the
receptor language, the message is preserved and the translation is faithful.
Data 3.
SL: “Would you like to watch The Avenue?” asked Mr Harris weakly. “It‟s just started.” p.95
TL: “Kau mau menonton The Avenue?” Tanya Mr Harris lemas. “Filmnya baru saja mulai.”
28
Data 4.
SL: “Did you know that in 1995, Philips Yadzik of Chicago, USA, ate 77 large hamburgers in two hours. p.68
TL: “Tahukah kau bahwa pada tahun 1995, Philips Yadzik asal Chicago, Amerika Serikat, memakan 77 hamburger
besar dalam waktu dua jam?”. p.6 The writer classified this paragraph as communicative translation method
too, because translator does not change the word culture from source language into target language. Based on the Indonesian-English dictionary, in the source
language culture, the word hamburger is round-shaped bread in which there are slices of meat, leaf lettuce, ketchup, cheese and other condiments.
45
Moreover, in another dictionary, definition of the word hamburger is a type stand store of
food.
46
While the word of The Avenue which underlined in the novel says that is the event a film aired on TV where the novel comes from. The translator of the
novel translated the word hamburger is the precise contextual meaning to the source language within the constraints of the target language grammatical
structures and the cultural word not translate, because the current hamburger is well known everywhere, include in Indonesia where published this novel. And for
The Avenue itself which means the name of an event usually would not change even if shown elsewhere. In this paragraph the translator tries to translate the
meaning of the source text attempting to convey the writers intention. Yet, the translation keeps the grammar of the SL and the lexis that deviate the TL norms.
In addition, the writer classify that those paragraph above is categorized as formal
45
KBBI online, http:kbbi.web.id hamburger
46
Alan M. Sevens and A. Ed. Schmidgall-Tellings, Kamus Lengkap Indonesia-Inggris, Indonesia:Mizan Media Utama, 2009, p.346
29
equivalence. The translator of the this novel is re-use the word of hamburger and The Avenue as the precise contextual meaning to the source language
within the constraints of the target language grammatical structures and the cultural word not translate, because the current hamburger already is well
known everywhere, including in the target language of this novel. In this paragraph the translator tries to translate the meaning of the source text to convey
the writers intention with words which consists of a target language item which represents the closest equivalent of a source language word or phrase.
Data 5.
SL: “Righ,” said Ms Wiz. “FISH stands for freeing Illustrated Storybook Heroes. It‟s a magic potion.” p.88
TL: “Benar,” kata Ms Wiz. “BACEM singkaan dari Bebaskan Pahlawan Buku cerita Bergambar.
Itu ramuan ajaib.” p.26 This paragraph the writer classify as communicative translation method.
At this paragraph there are cultures that converted the source language into the target language culture and the text rewritten as close as possible in order to be
understood easily by the target language. Like the word FISH stands for freeing Illustrated Storybook Heroes source language which supposedly translates to
ikan. But, in fact, in the target language of this novel is defined as BACEM, which is the name of the dish a meal typical of a region. Although the stands for
translates to the target language of similar, but the word FISH and BACEM in the language of each culture actually has a different meaning. In this case, the
meaning of both the stands for actually refers to the word FISH only, it means
30
alphabet F is heaving purpose the word freeing, alphabet I is Illustrated, alphabet S is Storybook, and alphabet H is Heroes in source language.
But in target language the translator found word BACEM which when abbreviated has the same meaning as the source language, i.e., B is means
Bebaskan, A is pAhlawan, CE is bukuCErita, and M is bergaMbar. At here translator tries to found the equivalent word in order to have the same
meaning and better understood by the target language. And also this translation use dynamic equivalence because according the writer, the translator seeks to
translate the original text can be changed by using other words as long as long as the change follows the rules of back transformation in the source language.
Data 6.
SL: “Podge,” said Jack wearily. “You are a complete and utter nerdbrain.” p.80 TL: “Podge,” ujar Jack lemas. “Kau benar-benar otak udang.”P.18
The writer classified this paragraph as communicative translation method again. Why the writer classified his paragraph as communicative translation
method. Because in the word nerdbrain or otak udang is mean very stupid or orang yang bodoh.
47
In this case source language relayed in target text with a figurative meaning that is understood in relation to the common use of that
expression that is separated from the literal meaning or definition of the words are made.
According to Newmark‟s concepts said that communicative translation attempts to render the exact contextual meaning of the original in such a way that
both content and language are readily acceptable and comprehensible to the readership and of course in accordance with the target language. Besides, the
47
http:peribahasa.wapamp.comarti?dari=seperti_otak_udang
31
dynamic equivalence has purpose to get the naturalness level in expressing message for readers to easily understand what the message of source text is.
Data 7.
SL: “May favourwite libway? I wed may vair farst book theah”. P.112 TL: “Pperfusthakaan favori sayah? Sayah membacha bukhu fertamah sayah di
syanah.” p.49
Data 8.
SL: Wheah is the Chief Lejaah Orficer?” said a loud voice from next door. “I
demaaaand to see her” p.109
TL: “Manakah Kerpala Pejuabhat Rekreasyih?” Kata sebuah suara keras dari
ruang sebelah. “Saya menuntuuuuutttt berthemu denguannyah” p.46 The writer classified that both of paragraph above is again and again as
communicative translation method. This paragraph shows that the translator uses language that is tailored to his imagination. Translators rely on translations that
may not be in accordance with good language but the slight increase in the actual words that can be understood by readers of the target language. In this case the
translator tries to convey the contextual meaning of the source language so similar, in order that the content and language can be understood by the world of
the target language reader. And then, this it is dynamic equivalence because translator seeks to translate the meaning of the original in such a way that the
target language wording will trigger the same impact on the TC audience as the original wording did upon the ST audience.
Data 9.
SL: “Podge,” said Jack, putting down his book. “Did you know that the most annoying person in the entire universe is Podge
„Motormouth‟ Harris of
32
London, England, who once had a Guinness Book of Records pushed right up his left nostril because he talked about food all the time?” p.70
TL: “Podge,” tukas Jack, seraya meletakan bukunya. “Tahukah kau orang yang
paling menyebalkan diseluruh jagat raya ini adalah Podge „Mulutmotor‟
Harris asal London, Inggris, yang lubang hidungnya pernah dijejali Guinness Book of Records
– buku yang memuat tentang rekor-rekor dunia – karena dia selalu berbicara tentang makanan?” p.7-8
The last, in the paragraph above, maybe the viewers can assume that the data above get two translation methods in a single paragraph from the translator.
First is idiomatic translation and the second is faithful translation. In idiomatic translation, the word Motormouth or „Mulutmotor‟ is compared with the loud
voice and winsome or like to brag. While in faithful translation, the words “Guinness Book of Records“ in source language translated back by the translator
is “Guinness Book of Records“ in target language because that is a book containing a collection of records that exist in the world in order to translate
paragraph devoted to re-use translations as holding fast to the purpose and intent of the source language so it looks as rigid translation. But, outside of the fact that
all adhere to the communicative translation for the main purpose of the translation itself so that the readers really understand the content of such content. Of the
translations above usually have dynamic equivalence type as modified forms of the original text, but do not change the rules back transformation in the source
language.
33
CHAPTER IV CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
Kategori