Meaning Equivalence Translation procedures and meaning equivalence in subtitle of animated movie monster university

22

D. Meaning Equivalence

A meaning equivalence is an indication of the level or degree of “sameness” between the source text and target text. 38 To gauge the level of equivalence of the subtitle of Monsters University, the writer chose Nida‟s equivalence theory, which are the formal and dynamic equivalence. The definitions for the theories are as follows: a Formal Equivalence Formal equivalence is an equivalence theory that focuses attention on the message itself in both form and content, its main objective is to match the form and content of the message as closely as possible. 39 From this definition, it can be concluded that this equivalence focuses on preserving the “foreigness” or the originality of the SL within the TL. Thus, it can be said that Formal Equivalence is an SL based or SL focused equivalence theory. b Dynamic Equivalence Nida states that the goal of dynamic equivalence is to produce the closest natural equivalent to the source-language message. 40 The naturalness is the keyword here, and it attempts to minimize the “foreignness” of the SL effects. To sum it up, this equivalence focuses on achieveing a sense of naturalness towards 38 Despoina Panou. 2013. Equivalence in Translation Theories: A Critical Evaluation. Department of Education, University of Leicester: UK p.2 http:ojs.academypublisher.comindex.phptplsarticleviewFiletpls030101066188 Accessed February 4th, 2014 39 Eugene A Nida. 1964. Toward a Science of Translating. E.J.Brill: Leiden p.159 40 Eugene A Nida, Op.cit. p.166 23 the readers. The naturalness will give the text acceptable and comprehensible traits on it, making it a high readability material for the readers. From both equivalences ‟ definitions above, it can be said that the formal equivalence aims to reproduce foreign elements in TL and dynamic equivalence aims to clarity of message in TL. Looking at this, it proves that both of them operate on the notion of foreignness versus naturalness in TL. To put it simply, it‟s all about SL focus or TL focus. To distinguish the characteristics between the two equivalence theory, the following table is made by the writer to give a better explanation of the differences between them: Table 2: Comparison of Formal and Dynamic Equivalence Theory Formal Equivalence Dynamic Equivalence Tends to overtranslate in order to stay faithful. Tends to undertranslate to gain simplicity. Tries to replicate the content and structure to preserve originality. Tries to deviate from the original by adding or deleting some part of the text. Preserves the cultural elements in the text. Integrates or neutralizes the cultural elements of SL in TL text. To make the analysis process easier, the writer made an inclination table of Ne wmark‟s procedures towards Formal and Dynamic Equivalence theory. This data is made by comparing the Newmark‟s translation procedures‟ definition with 24 the characteristics of Nida‟s Formal and Dynamic Equivalence, thus, an inclination can be found and tabulated as depicted in the following table: Table 3 : Newmark‟s Translation Procedures‟ inclinationemphasis towards Formal and Dynamic Equivalence Formal Equivalence Dynamic Equivalence Transference Transference Naturalisation Naturalisation - Cultural Equivalent Synonymy Synonymy Couplets Couplets - Functional Equivalent - Transposition - Modulation - Expansion and Reduction - Descriptive Equivalent Notice that some of the procedures share their inclination or emphasis with both formal and dynamic equivalence; this is due to the flexibility of the procedures, as they are meant to be coupled with each other. Procedures such as transference, naturalisation, cultural equivalent, etc as described in Newmark‟s book, are meant to supplement with each other in a couplet. 41 Depending on what 41 Peter Newmark, Op.Cit. p.83 25 procedures they are paired with, the procedures might emphasize on an entirely different method. In the other hand, descriptive equivalent, functional equivalent, transposition, modulation, expansion and reduction, is strictly inclined or emphasized on dynamic equivalence. If one of them is paired with other procedures, it would inevitably be emphasized on dynamic equivalence. This is due to their nature of “deviation” in translation. As described in the procedures‟ definitions in chapter II, some of the procedures involve having to change the structure transposition or completely change the words to produce a similar expression modulation. This fits the characteristics of dynamic equivalence, as this equivalence theory tries to reproduce TL in a simpler and natural way that conforms to a particular register in TL. 26 CHAPTER III RESEARCH FINDINGS

A. Data Description