3. Theories of Equivalence
Equivalence is an approach that is used to find the similarity meaning. It is transferred from source language into target language. Translation is a
reproduction of a meaning, form, and message in both source and target language. Equivalence is a way to make a meaning as close as possible between source and
target language. It is explained by Nida as follows: The concept of equivalence as one of the key words in translation studies
is called the closest natural equivalent.1 equivalent, which points toward the source language message; 2 natural, which points to the receptor
language; and 3 closest, which binds the orientations together on the basis of the highest degree of approximation. 1974: 164
According to Nida, there are two types of equivalence. They are formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. The first type is formal equivalence. It
focuses on the form and the meaning of SL. It is supported by Nida‟s statement
which is: Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself, in both form
and content. It distorts the grammatical and stylistic patterns of the receptor language 1964:159.
This type translates word by word from SL to TL. Moreover, the translations also adjust the structure pattern in TL, for instance is
“today is very hot”. It is translated into “hari ini sangat panas”. According to the example, the
translation keeps the structure and the form of SL. It also adjusts the structure pattern in TL.
The second type is dynamic equivalence. It focuses on the effect when the text is translated from source language into target language. Nida argues her
opinion about the dynamic equivalence as follows: PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
Dynamic equivalence is based on „the principle of equivalent effect‟,
where the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptors
and the message Nida 1964:159
The change of structure sentence is allowed as long as the meaning of the text is still same. Dynamic equivalence does not focus on the form, but it focuses
on the effect of the meaning from SL to TL. For instance is “I‟m hungry” is translated into “saya mau makan”. It can be seen that the translation from SL to
TL is different, but they have a same effect. Meanwhile, Koller divides the equivalence into 5 types. The first is formal
equivalence. In this type, SL and TL words have similar orthographic or phonological features 1979:187. The word internet in English is translated to
internet in Bahasa Indonesia. The second is denotative equivalence. Here, SL word is replaced by TL word that refers to the same thing 1979: 187. The third is
connotative equivalence. It is the opposite of denotative equivalence. Here, the SL and TL word triggers the same or similar associations in the mind of speaker of
the two languages 1979:187. The word sugar daddy has the same meaning in Bahasa Indonesia as pria hidung belang. It cannot be described literally because of
its context. The fourth is text-normative equivalence. SL and TL word being used in
the similar contexts in their respective languages 1979:188. The fifth is pragmatic equivalence. The other name of pragmatic equivalence is dynamic
equivalence. The SL and TL word has the same effect on their respective reader 1979: 190. It will bring the effect on TL reader which close to that experienced
by the ST reader. The sentence “We need enough air to take a breath” shows that PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
the room is hot. That sentence can be translated in Bahasa Indonesia to “Tolong buka jendelanya”. Even though the sentence is not translated word by word, it still
maintains the meaning that the room is hot.
4. Theories of Readability
Kategori