Foreignization and Domestication a. Definitions of Foreignization and Domestication

in the source language text depends more on the context than upon a fixed system of verbal consistency. Moreover, Nida and Taber 1982: 56, also state that there are two kinds of meaning; they are referential meaning and connotative meaning. Referential meaning considers words as symbols which refer to objects, events, and abstract relations. Connotative meaning covers words as prompters of reactions of the participants in communication. Meanwhile Baker 1992:10 describes that translation is primarily concerned with communicating the overall meaning of a stretch of language. It is the meaning which is being transferred and must be held constant since meaning is a variable of great importance in a process of translation. Halliday 1994: xiii says that fundamental components of meaning in language are functional components, which are interpersonal, textual, and ideational meanings. Then, he further explains that interpersonal meaning is meaning as a form of action. Textual meaning is the putting of referential information into a coherent whole. Ideational meaning is the meaning in the senses of content. It is the representation of the outer and the inner world of experience. Ideational meaning is then divided into two sub functions. They are experiential meaning and logical meaning. Experiential meaning deals with the content or ideas and logical meaning deals with the relationship between ideas.

5. Equivalence in Meaning

Catford 1965:50 states that translation equivalence occurs when a source language SL and a target language TL text or item are relatable at least some of the same features of substance. Meanwhile, Hatim 2001:28 states that translation equivalence may be achieved at any or all of the following levels: a. SL and TL words having similar orthographic or phonological features formal equivalence; b. SL and TL words referring to the same thing in the real world referential and denotative equivalence; c. SL and TL words triggering the same of similar associations in the minds of speakers of the two languages connotative equivalence; d. SL and TL words being used in the same or similar contexts in their respective languages text-formative equivalence; e. SL and TL words having the same effect on their respective readers pragmatic or dynamic equivalence. Beside, Bell 1991:6 says that an ideal of total equivalence is a chimera. There is no absolute synonymy. Something will always be lost or gained in translating process and translators find themselves being accused of reproducing only part of the original and so betraying the authors intentions. He also says that a source text that is transferred in to a target language can be equivalent in different degrees. It can be fully equivalent or partly equivalent. Based on Bell s theory, meaning equivalence can be expanded into four terms. They are fully equivalent meaning, partly equivalent meaning, different meaning and no meaning.