d. Equivalence in Translation
Equivalent can be said to be the central issue in translation although its definition, relevance, and applicability within the field of translation theory. Baker
1992: 18 defines equivalence as a relation between a source language SL text and a target language TL text. Machali 1998: 3 states that target language
equivalents have to be sou ght not simply in terms of the ‘sameness of meaning’,
but in terms of the greatest possible overlap of situational range. Thus, equivalence in translation should not be approached as a search for sameness
since sameness of meaning cannot easily exist between the source language and the target language.
Nida in Venuti, 2000: 133 states that it is not easy to produce a completely natural translation. This happen because not every word in one
language can be translated into another. To solve this problem, translator must modify this translation by using another word in target language TL that
equivalent with the word in source language SL so the reader of the translation can understand. It is important for a translator to make sure the message from the
source text can be delivered correctly into the target text, so that it is a mandatory for a translator to have a deep knowledge about both languages.
Meaning transferring process from the source language to the target language has to consider the principle of equivalence when the meaning between
the source language and the target language are not equivalent; the basic notion of the source language is unaccepted by the target reader. In fact, not all meanings
can be transferred to the target language due to the cultural gap. Whatever the
problem is, equivalence must be the first awareness. Catford 1965: 50 says that translation equivalence occurs when a source language and a target language or
item are relatable at least some of the features of substances. There have been many experts advancing some types of equivalence. The
varieties of the types are because of differences in points of view. Nida in Venuti 2000: 129 suggests formal and dynamic or functional equivalence.
1 Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and
content. It requires that the message in the target language should match as closely as possible the different elements in the source language. It is
basically source-oriented, which means it is designed to reveal as much as possible of the form and content of the original message.
2 Dynamic equivalence is based on the principle of equivalent effect, where the
relationship between the receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptors and the message. It
aims at complete naturalness of expression. Its focus of attention is directed, not so much toward the source message, as toward the receptor response. One
way to define a dy namic equivalence translation is to describe it as ‘the
closest natural equivalent to the source- language message.’
2. Culture and Culture-Specific Terms
a. Notions of Culture
Larson in Terestyényi, 2011: 13 defines culture as “a complex beliefs, attitudes, v
alues, and rules which a group of people share.” Larson notes that the translator needs to understand beliefs, attitudes, values, and the rules of the source
Kategori