Baker 2001: 5 has divided equivalence into five groups according to the level of the text, they are: 1 equivalence at word level, which is the meaning of
single words and expressions; 2 equivalence above word level, which investigates combinations of words and phrases; 3 grammatical equivalence,
which delves into grammatical categories; 4 textual equivalence, which explores the text level; and 5 pragmatic equivalence, which discusses how texts are used
in communicative situations that involves numerous variables such as writers, readers, and cultural context.
Nida and Taber 1982: 22 suggest different classification of equivalence, formal correspondence and dynamic equivalence. Formal correspondence
emphasizes on the message of the text in form and content, while dynamic equivalence focuses on delivering the exact same message of source text in target
language in order to receive the same response from target readers as expected from readers in source language. In the book, however, Nida and Taber emphasize
that the latter equivalence is the better one. They believe that maintaining the content of the text is more important than preserving its form.
Another classification involving five sub-categories in translation equivalence is also made by Koller 1979, known as
‘Korrespondenz and Aquivalenz, as cited in Shojaei 2012: 1222. The classification is as follows: 1
denotative equivalence or content invariances, which is related to non-linguistic content of a text; 2 connotative equivalence or stylistic equivalence, which deals
with a feeling or idea that is suggested by a particular word although it is not necessarily a part of that word‘s meaning; 3 text-normative equivalence, which
examines different text types in which different types of texts behave in different ways; 4 pragmatic equivalence, which investigates the influence if the text on
the target language audience; and 5 formal equivalence , which focuses on ‗the
form and aesthetics of the text and meaning‘.
2.2.10. Translation Evaluation
Translation, even though seems like one of the most known discipline related to language, apparently still has an intriguing question that is yet to be answered:
how to tell whether a translation is good or bad. This is important, since as a discipline, it should allow formulas to test whether the product is reliable or not.
In her book, Larson 1998: 529 explains why translation product should be tested. She believes that translator wants his translation to be: 1 accurate, 2
clear, and 3 natural. Accuracy check is important because in rendering a text there are always possibilities that the translator adds information that is not really
in the source text or even fail to understand the real message of the source text. Clarity is the second criterion that needs to be passed. A translation can be
accurate, but it doesn‘t mean that the text will be received easily by target readers. The third criterion is naturalness. A translation may be accurate in conveying the
content of a text and understandable, however it may be not natural. Target readers probably find it foreign due to unusual grammatical forms or incorrect
diction. Translation should sounds like as if it is an original writing that is written in the target language.
Nababan, Nuraeni, Sumardiono 2012: 44 offers a parameter to assess the equivalence of a translation. They believe that three aspects should be studied
closely to determine the quality of a translation. They are accuracy, acceptability and readability. The term accuracy refers to the equivalence between source text
and target text. Acceptability is an aspect about whether the target text is rendered according to the culture, custom, and the norms of the source language.
Meanwhile, readability deals with not only the readability of the source text, but also the readability of the target text.
There are also other sets of criteria to assess translation, such as what is suggested by The Institute of Linguists‘ IoL Diploma in Translation as cited by
Munday 2001: 30. The criteria are: 1 accuracy, 2 the appropriate choice of vocabulary, idiom, terminology and register, 3 cohesion, coherence and
organization, and 4 accuracy in technical aspects of punctuation, etc. To check whether a translation fulfill these criteria, a test needs to be
applied. Larson 1998: 533 provides several ways of testing, they are: 1 comparison with the source text, 2 back-translation into the source language, 3
comprehension checks, 4 naturalness and readability testing, and 5 consistency checks.
2.2.11. Translation Accuracy
As shown in the previous sub-heading, some scholars believe that accuracy is one of the most important aspect that needs to be examined in order to assess if a
translation is equivalent or not.
