Table 6. Foreignization and Domestication of the Culturally-Bound Expressions
Translation Techniques Frequency Percentage
Foreignization Amplification
34 11.80
Borrowing 44
15.28 Description
105 36.47
Literal Translation 1
0.34
Total Foreignization 63.84
Domestication Adaptation
60 20.84
Generalization 33
11.45 Reduction
7 2.43
Discursive Creation 4
1.39
Total Domestication 36.16
Total 288
100
The table shows that the most frequently used technique is description with 105 data 36.47, followed by adaptation with 60 data 20.84, borrowing
with 44 data 15.28, amplification with 34 data 11.80, generalization with 33 data 11.45, reduction with 7 data 2.43, discursive creation with 4 data
1.39, and the last one is literal translation with one datum 0.34. The table also shows that the number of foreignization is higher rather
than the domestication. It indicates that the translated novel tends to be foreignized. It is in line with the purpose of Yayasan Lontar which is translated
this novel. The aim to promote Indonesian literature by translating is successfully done by the translator. The translator likely chooses to preserve the source
language culture.
2. Degree of Meaning Equivalence of the Translation of the Culturally-
Bound Expressions
Transferring meaning or message from source text into target text is the most important part in translation. The essence of the message is the key for the
target reader to understand that. Thus, this study finds that the translator successfully translates the culturally-bound expressions from the source text of
Para Priyayi Novel into Javanese Gentry translated novel.
Table 7. Degree of Meaning Equivalence No
Degree of Meaning Frequency
Percentage
1 Equivalent Meaning
Fully Equivalent Meaning 197
68.41 Partly Equivalent Meaning
67 23.26
2 Non Equivalent Meaning
Different Meaning 18
6.25 No Meaning
6 2.08
Total 288
100
The table shows that fully equivalent meaning has the higher number with 197 data 68.41, followed by partly equivalent meaning with 68 data 23.26,
followed by different meaning with 18 data 6.25, and the last is no meaning with 6 data 2.08.
Table 8. The Frequency of Translation Techniques and Meaning Equivalence
Meaning Equivalent Fully
Equivalent Meaning
Partly Equivalent
Meaning Different
Meaning No
meaning Total
Translation Techniques
Amplification 32
2 34
Borrowing 43
1 44
Description 81
23 1
105 Literal Translation
1 1
Adaptation 36
14 10
60 Generalization
2 23
7 1
33 Reduction
2 5
7 Discursive Creation
2 2
4 Total
197 67
18 6
288
The table shows the number of meaning equivalence in translation techniques used. It can be seen that fully equivalent meaning is noted as the
highest number with 197 data. The fully equivalent meaning is mostly can be reached by the description technique 81 data. Besides the description technique,
borrowing technique also tends to be fully equivalent meaning. It can be seen that from 44 data, the 43 data belong to fully equivalent meaning.
Partly equivalent meaning is noted as the second rank after the highest one, fully equivalent meaning. There are 67 data noted as partly equivalent
meaning. The techniques which lead to be partly equivalent meaning are description, generalization, and adaptation. There are 23 data from description
technique, 23 data from generalization technique, and 15 data from adaptation technique.
Different meaning is noted as the third rank from the meaning categories. There are 18 noted as the different meaning. The adaptation technique contributes
as the common technique which leads to be different meaning 10 data. It is followed by generalization technique 7 data and description technique 1 data.
No meaning is noted as the lowest rank. There are only 6 data noted as the no meaning. It is composed by 5 data from reduction technique and one datum from
generalization technique. It also can be seen that the description, amplification, borrowing and
adaptation have tendency to be equivalent fully and partly equivalent meaning. The techniques of adaptation and generalization are noted as the techniques which
have variety of possibilities. The reduction technique though has tendency to be no meaning and it also can be noted as one of lowest data found with 7 data. It is
followed by discursive creation with 4 data, and the last is literal translation with one datum.
B. Discussion
1. Foreignization and Domestication of the Culturally-Bound
Expressions
a. Foreignization
Foreignization is way which translator chooses to keep source language culture essence. In this study, the techniques which are closely related to be
foreignization are amplification, borrowing, description and literal translation.
1 Amplification
In this study there are 34 or 11.80 data found as an amplification technique. Amplification is applied to inform details the source expression. The
example can be seen below.
SL : Yang masih Nampak gagah dan kokoh adalah pendopo kabupaten dan alun-
alun.
TL: This is the old pendopo, the open sided audience hall where regents used to meet the kabupaten’s assembled dignitaries.
05PP.02JG.03 ―Pendopo Kabupaten” is a certain old type of building in Javanese culture.
It is open sided hall, and the function of ―pendopo” itself depends on where it is
located. Thus, in this case the location of ―pendopo” is around the office of
Kabupaten. Because of that, the function of ―pendopo kabupaten” turns to be a
place to meet between officers in kabupaten itself. The translator clearly combines
the translated expression between keeps to provide the word ―pendopo” and gives it extra information based on the condition and function itself. The meaning is
translated clearly through the addition of that information which causes the target readers have to learn new thing. It means that the translator successfully uses
amplification technique. Other case relating to amplification is can be seen below. SL : Hanya bertahun-tahun kemudian waktu Pakde itu terdengar kabarnya
menjadi bas ketoprak keliling. TL : We heard that he had become the manager, the bas, of just such traveling
troupe dealing in old sagas and pseudo-history. 29PP.06JG.09
The ―bas ketoprak keliling” is represented into ―the manager, the bas, of
just such traveling troupe dealing in old sagas and pseudo-history ”. The word
“bas” actually has the connotative meaning as the main part, so in this case the phrase
“bas ketoprak” has meaning as someone or something that really has the main role in this
“ketoprak” group. In the target language also, the translator translates clearly those combination of words. The word bass is directly borrowed
and it is also given the definition too, the manager. Then the translator also gives the extra information about the about
―ketoprak” mean. It means that the translator offers something new to the target readers. They are forced to
understand what cultural expressions ―bas ketoprak‖ through those additional information. It indicates that the translator prefers to keep the essence of the SL.
The last example can be seen below.
