M01733

(1)

Esriaty S. Kendenan, M.Hum. [email protected] Satya Wacana Christian University – Salatiga

Abstract

Translating any kinds of literary works has a range of typical problems. Although most people think that translating poem is the most challenging practice, it doesn‟t mean that translating other types of literary works such as prose is much simpler than poem. The issue on literalness and naturalness in translation has become a never-ending problem in translation studies. It is not surprised if Newmark (1988: 26) said that “naturalness is easily defined, not so easy to be concrete about.” Therefore, this study aims at finding and then describing students‟ problems in translating an English short story into Indonesian in terms of the level of naturalness. Due to the number of important aspects to consider in analysing the translation of a short story, this study is going to focus the analysis on the translation of dialogues in the short story. In order to minimize her subjectivity, the writer would like to ask students who are taking English-Indonesian Translation to give their responses on the naturalness of the translation. The result of this study is expected to have contribution on translation studies, especially in the teaching and learning process of literary translation.

Keywords: Literary works, literary translation, literalness, naturalness, translation studies.

Introduction

Naturalness has always been being a debatable issue in Translation Studies. Some are questioning about the standard to qualify/assess the naturalness degree of translation, especially in terms of the subjectivity and objectivity of the assessors or readerships. Definitely, there are some things that should be taken into account to determine the degree of naturalness of a translated text. The type (genre) of text, target readership, situation, media, and the number of people who choose the word or terms or phrases or utterances are some things that might need to be considered in determining the naturalness of a translated text. After all, every language has natural characteristics for its speakers.

Naturalness is not only important for the practical reason but for the quality assessment of translation especially for students of any translation subject. As a matter of fact, naturalness is one important aspect in translation though it might be the most difficult item to assess. People in general might agree with Nida & Taber (1974:12) who said that “the best translation does not sound like a translation.”

In translating a short story as one of the literary works, Hillaire Belloc (Bassnett, 1991) proposed six general rules. Two of them are 1) that the translator does not translate word by word or sentence by sentence, but consider the works as an integral unit, and 2) that the translator translates idiom by idiom in a very natural way in the target language. In translating a literary work, there are some aspects that should be considered by a translators. For that reason, it is also important to focus the analysis of the translation study on certain aspect. One of the aspects that could become the main focus of the study is how translators translate dialogue(s) in the prose, especially short story (Williams & Chesterman (2002:10).

Theoretical Review and Discussion A. Natural Translation and Literal Translation

Natural translation and literal translation seem to be placed in the opposite direction in the quality assessment of translation. Thus, if a translation is considered natural in one hand, it is more likely to be not literal on the other hand and vice versa.

1) Natural Translation

It is definitely not easy to determine whether a translation is natural or not for several reasons. As Newmark (1988: 28-29) said that:

(2)

“There is no universal naturalness. Naturalness depends on the relationship between the writer and the readership and the topic or situation. What is natural in one situation may be unnatural in another, but everyone has a natural, „neutral‟ language where spoken and informal written language more or less coincide.”

The lack of universality has become a challenge for everyone in assessing translation based on the degree of its naturalness, especially in terms of their objectivity.

For the translators themselves, it is important to make sure that their translation makes sense and might be read naturally in the target language in accordance with common grammar, idioms, and words that are appropriate in certain situation (Newmark, 1988).

Instead of using natural translation, Larson (1984) preferred to use the term idiomatic translation to refer to a translation which has the same meaning as the source language but is expressed in the natural form of the receptor language.

2) Literal Translation

Newmark (1988:46) described literal translation as a process in which “The SL grammatical constructions are converted to their nearest TL equivalents but the lexical words are again translated singly, out of context. As a pre-translation process, this indicates the problems to be solved.”

According to Larson (1984) a literal translation is useful especially in analyzing the source text. For that reason, Newmark (1988) thinks that literal translation actually can become the basic step in translation.

When a translator employs a literal translation, he/she may start “from a word-for-word translation, but make changes in conformity with TL grammar (e.g. inserting additional words, changing structures at any rank, etc.); this may make it a group-group or clause-clause translation” (Catford, 1974).

By considering what Larson (1984) said that literal translation is not recommended for it does not communicate the meaning of the source text, the practice of natural or idiomatic translation needs to be taken into account in translating and in assessing the quality of translation.

B. The Study on “The Short Happy Life of Conat”

The text chosen for this study is a short story that was originally written by an Indonesian author, Mochtar Lubis, that has been translated into English by Harry Aveling entitled “The Short Happy Life of Conat”. The writer chose this English translated version to be translated back into Indonesian by students in English-Indonesian Translation class as the object of this study for a number of reason.

First, the setting of the story is familiar for Indonesian students. As an example, students may easily portray the life of a trishaw driver that can be found almost in every city in Indonesia. Students‟ background knowledge on Indonesian history, particularly in the revolution era will help them also to understand the conflict and social problems well.

Second, Indonesian students would also be more familiar with the utterances/expressions or interjections that are particularly used in Indonesian society. So, they should be more in common with every nuance of meaning/sense to translate the text. Thus, it is assumed that back translation from English into Indonesian would be easier and appropriate for those Indonesian students, especially in relation with the assessment of naturalness in translation.

The object of this study is the translation of 16 dialogues taken from the “The Short Happy Life of Conat” short story. The translation from English into Indonesian was done by 12 students in English into Indonesian Translation class, so there are 12 versions of translation that would become the object of this study. In assessing the naturalness degree of the translation made by student translators, the writer involved 67 students in 4 classes of English into Indonesian Translation to have more objective responses.

C. Naturalness vs Literalness in Students’ Translation on Dialogues

These are the analysis of the way student translators translate 16 dialogues found in “The Short Happy Life of Conat” short story and the description of student respondents assessment on the degree of naturalness of those translations. In addition, it also describes the degree of literalness of each dialogue translation in comparison to its level of naturalness.

(3)

51 Table 1.1 Dialogue 1:

“My patience is ended…”, ST

TT (Students‟ Translation)

A B C D E F G H I J K L

“My patie nce is ende d…”,

“kesab aranku telah habis… ”.

“kesab aranku sudah habis… ,”

“Kesab aranku telah habis… ”,

“Kesab aranku telah berakhi r….”

“kesab aranku telah habis “,

“Kesab aranku telah habis... ”

“kesab aranku telah habis “,

“Kesab aranku telah berakhi r...”,

“Kesab aranku sudah habis... ”, It seems that there is an inconsistency of student respondents in assessing the naturalness of the dialogue 1. It is because although the expression was translated by seven students with “Kesabaranku telah habis ...” but there is a discrepancy in the number and percentage of students‟ responses. The highest percentage of student respondents who perceive that the Indonesian translation for the dialogue become “Kesabaranku telah berakhir ...” is unnatural/ very unnatural is also different with other student respondents in assessing the similar versions of translation. Thus, students are not always consistent in determining whether the translation is natural or not.

The word “berakhir” is literally close in meaning to “ended” in English. However, Indonesian speaker naturally would be more accustomed to use “habis” in referring to the end of emotional feeling which is different with an ending of an activity/process.

Table 1.2 Dialogue 2:

“Life is short! I know that! Fate decides everything!” ST

TT (Students‟ Translation)

A B C D E F G H I J K L

“Life is short! I know that! Fate decide s everyt hing! ”

”hidu p itu singk at.ak u tahu itu. Semu a ditent ukan oleh takdir .!”.

“Hidu p itu singka t! Aku tahu itu! Takdir yang menen tukan segala nya!”.

“Hidu p itu pende k! Aku tau itu! Nasib menen tukan segala nya!.”

“Hidu p ini singk at! Dan aku tahu itu! Adala h takdir yang mene ntuka n segal anya! ”

“Hidu p itu singk at! Aku tahu itu! Takdi r mene ntuka n segal anya! ”

kehid upan ini singk at, sepert i yang aku ketah ui, takdir memu tuska n semua hal!.

“Hidu p itu singk at! Aku tahu itu! Takdi r mene ntuka n segal anya! ”

kehid upan ini singk at, sepert i yang aku ketah ui, takdir memu tuska n semua hal!.

“Hidu p ini singka t! Saya tahu itu! Takdir menen tukan segala nya!”.

“Hidu p itu singka t! Aku tahu itu! Takdir menen tukan segala nya!”.

”Hid up itu singk at! Aku tahu itu! Takdi rlah yang mene ntuka n segal a-galan ya!” 76.1% of student respondents think that student‟s translation of the dialogue 2 become

“Hidup itu singkat! Aku tahu itu! Takdir yang menentukan segalanya!” is natural/ very natural. While 65.7% of student respondents consider that “Hidup ini singkat! Dan aku tahu itu! Adalah takdir yang menentukan segalanya!”as the translation for the dialogue is unnatural/ very unnatural. Athough there are two students who translate the dialogue in the similar way, but the percentages of student respondents who consider that the translation is natural/very natural are different in number, i.e. 70.1% and 61.2%.

(4)

The use of “Dan” and “Adalah” in the second version of translation are not natural in Indonesian grammatical structure, especially in a dialogue or conversation. Literally, the pattern seems like an English grammatical structure.

Table 1.3 Dialogue 3:

“Don’t worry about it. They wouldn’t be leaders if they didn’t know more than us, would they? Would they, if they were stupid? If they tell you to do something, do it. They know best. They wouldn’t be

leaders if they didn’t.” ST

TT (Students‟ Translation)

A B C D E F G H I J K L

“Do n’t worr y abou t it. They woul dn’t be lead ers if they didn ’t kno w more than us, woul d they ? Wou ld they, if they were stupi d? If they tell you to do some thing , do it. They kno w best. They woul “ tak perlu khawat ir menge nai hal itu. Merek a tidak akan menjad i seoran g pemim pin bila tidak lebih tahu dari kita, bukan? Akank ah mereka menjad i pemim pin bila mereka bodoh ? Bila mereka memer intahk an kalian untuk melaku kan sesuat u, lakuka nlah. ”Jang an khawa tir. Merek a tidak akan menja di pemim pin jika tidak lebih tahu daripa da kita, benar kan? Akank ah merek a menja di pemim pin jika merek a bodoh ? Jika merek a berkat a kepad a kalian untuk melak ukan sesuat u, lakuka “Jang an khawa tir tentan g itu. Merek a tidak akan menja di pemim pin jika merek a tidak lebih tahu dari kita, bukan ? Apaka h merek a mau jika merek a bodoh ? Jika merek a menga takan kepad amu untuk melak ukan sesuat u, lakuka n. “Jang an khawa tir tentan g itu. Merek a tidak akan menja di pemim pin jika merek a tidak lebih tahu daripa da kita, ya kan? Akank ah merek a menja di pemim pin kalau merek a bodoh ? Jika merek a memer intahm u untuk melak ukan sesuat u, “jang an khaw atir tentan g itu. Mere ka tidak akan menja di pemi mpin jika merek a tidak lebih tahu dari kita, akan kah merek a? Akan kah merek a, jika merek a bodoh ? Jika merek a memb eritah umu untuk melak ukan sesuat u, lakuk an. janga n mengk hawati rkan tentan g itu, merek a tidak akan menja di pemim pin jikala u merek a tidak tahu lebih dari kita, benar khan? Bisaka h merek a kalau merek a bodoh ? Jika merek a memb eritah u kamu untuk melak ukan sesuat u, lakuka nlah. “Tida k usah khaw atir. Mere ka tidak akan menja di pemi mpin jika merek a tidak lebih tahu dari kita,b ukan? Akan kah, jika merek a bodo h? Jika merek a meny uruh kita untuk melak ukan sesua tu, lakuk anlah , merek a tahu janga n kuatir tentan g itu, merek a tidak akan menja di pemi mpin seand ainya merek a tidak tahu lebih dari kita, akan kah merek a? Akan kah merek an kalau merek a bodoh ? Jika merek a memb eritah u kamu untuk melak ukan sesuat u. “Jan gan kha wati r men gena i hal terse but. Mer eka tidak akan bisa menj adi pemi mpin apab ila mere ka tidak tahu lebih dari pada kita. Apa bila mere ka berk ata pada kita untu k mela kuka n sesu atu, mak a ”Jang an khawa tir. Merek a tidak akan menja di pemim pin jika tidak lebih tahu daripa da kita, benar kan? Akank ah merek a menja di pemim pin jika merek a bodoh ? Kalau merek a berkat a kepad a kalian untuk melak ukan sesuat u, “Jan gan khaw atir. Mere ka tidak akan menj adi pemi mpin jika mere ka tidak lebih tahu dari kita, ya kan? Akan kah mere ka menj adi pemi mpin jika mere ka bodo h? Jika mere ka memi ntam u melak ukan sesua tu, lakuk

(5)

53 dn’t

be lead ers if they didn ’t.

Merek a megert i apa yang terbaik . Merek a tidak akan menjad i pemim pin bila mereka tidak tahu itu.

nlah. Merek a tahu yang terbaik . Merek a tidak akan menja di pemim pin jika tidak melak ukann ya.

Merek a tahu yang terbai k. Merek a tidak akan menja di pemim pin jika merek a tidak tahu.

lakuka nlah. Merek a tahu yang terbaik . Merek a tidak akan menja di pemim pin jikalau merek a tidak mamp u.

Mere ka tahu yang terbai k. Mere ka tidak akan menja di pemi mpin jika merek a tidak melak ukann ya.

Merek a tahu yang terbai k, merek a tidak akan menja di pemim pin kalau merek a tidak melak ukan apapu n.

apa yang terbai k. Mere ka tidak akan menja di pemi mpin jika merek a tidak tahu.

Lakuk anlah , merek a tahu yang terbai k, merek a tidak akan menja di pemi mpin kalo merek a tidak mamp u.

mere ka tahu apa yang terb aik”.

lakuka nlah. Merek a tahu yang terbaik . Merek a tidak akan menja di pemim pin kalau tidak melak ukann ya.

anlah . Mere ka tahu yang terbai k. Mere ka tidak akan menj adi pemi mpin bila mere ka tidak tahu yang terbai k.” The highest percentage of student respondents‟ response for the unnatural/very unnatural is higher that the highest percentage of student respondents‟ response for the natural/very natural of the dialogue 3 Indonesian translation. 67.2% of student respondents think that it is unnatural/very unnatural to translate dialogue 3 into Indonesian becomes“jangan khawatir tentang itu. Mereka tidak akan menjadi pemimpin jika mereka tidak lebih tahu dari kita, akan kah mereka? Akan kah mereka, jika mereka bodoh? Jika mereka memberitahumu untuk melakukan sesuatu, lakukan. Mereka tahu yang terbaik. Mereka tidak akan menjadi pemimpin jika mereka tidak melakukannya”. On the other hand, there are 61.2% of student respondents think that the Indonesian translation for the dialogue becomes “Jangan khawatir. Mereka tidak akan menjadi pemimpin jika mereka tidak lebih tahu dari kita, ya kan? Akankah mereka menjadi pemimpin jika mereka bodoh? Jika mereka memintamu melakukan sesuatu, lakukanlah. Mereka tahu yang terbaik. Mereka tidak akan menjadi pemimpin bila mereka tidak tahu yang terbaik.”is natural/ very natural. The question and question tag “would they” become “akankah mereka” are translated word-for-word. As a result of the literal translation, the questions do not make sense for Indonesian target readership.

Table 1.4 Dialogue 4:

“One of the ministers really gave a good speech,” he told her. “If everyone was as committed as he is, we’d have had West New Guinea back a long time ago.”

TT (Students‟ Translation)

A B C D E F G H I J K L

“On e of the mini sters reall y gave a goo d

“sala h satu ment eri benar benar berpi dato bagu s,”

“Sala h seora ng Ment eri berpi dato denga n sanga

“Sala h satu mente ri sungg uh-sungg uh memb erika n

“Salah seoran g perdan a mentri membe ri pidato yang

benar-“Sala h satu dari para mente ri berpid ato denga n sangat

“Sal ah satu ment eri bena r-bena r mem berik

Salah seora ng perda na mente ri memb eri pidat o

“Sal ah satu ment eri mem berik an pidat o yang

Salah seora ng perda na mentr i memb eri pidat o

“Sala h satu dari para pejab at sungg uh memb erikan pidato

“Sala h seora ng Ment eri berpi dato degan sanga t

“sala h satu dari para mentr i memb erika n pidat

(6)

54 spee ch,” he told her. “If ever yone was as com mitt ed as he is, we’ d have had Wes t New Gui nea back a long time ago. ” dia berce rita kepa da istrin ya. “kala u semu a oran g berbu at seper ti dia, kita pasti telah memi liki kemb ali irian barat sejak dulu” t bagus ”, dia menc eritak an pada istrin ya. “Kal au semu a orang berko mitm men sepert i dia, kita akan mend apatk an Papu a Barat sejak dulu” . pidat o yang bagus ,” katan ya kepad a istrin ya. “Jika semu a orang berko mtime n sepert i dia, kita sudah mend apatk an kemb ali Papu a Barat sejak dulu. ” benar bagus” , ia berceri ta kepada istrinya . “Seand ainya setiap orang melaku kan apa yang dilakuk an perdan a menteri , kita pasti akan menda patkan Papua Barat sedari dulu.” bagus ”, ia berkat a kepad a istriny a. “Jika setiap orang melak ukan hal yang sama seperti apa yang beliau lakuka n, kita bisa mereb ut kemba li Papua Barat sejak dulu”. an sebu ah pidat o yang bagu s”, dia mem berit ahun ya.” Jika setia p oran g mela kuka n sama seper ti dia, kita akan mend apat kan Irian barat dari dulu. ” yang bagus , ia berce rita kepad a istrin ya, seand ainya setiap orang melak ukan sepert i perda na mente ri lakuk an, kita pasti akan mend apatk an kemb ali Irian Jaya barat sejak dulu. sang at bagu s,” katan ya pada istrin ya. “Jika semu a oran g mela kuka n apa yang dia lakuk an, kita pasti telah mere but Irian Bara t sejak lama. ” yang bagus , ia berce rti kepad a sang istri, seand ainya setiap orang melak ukan sepert i perda na mentr i, kita pasti akan mend apatk an Irian Jaya barat sejak dulu. yang bagus, ” katan ya pada istriny a. “Apa bila semua pejab at melak ukan sepert i apa yang ia lakuk an, tentu saja kita pasti sudah mend apatk an kemba li Papua Nugin i dari jauh – jauh hari.” bagus ”, dia menc eritak an pada istrin ya. “Kal au semu a orang berko mitm men sepert i dia, kita akan mend apatk an Papu a Barat sejak dulu” . o yang sanga t bagus ,” Conat berce rita kepad a istrin ya. “Kal au setiap orang berko mitme n sepert i dia, maka kita sudah mend apatk an kemb ali Irian Barat dari dulu”

The highest percentage of student respondents‟ response for dialogue 4 is less than 50%, for both unnatural/very unnatural and natural/very natural responses. There are only 47.8% of student respondents who think that it is natural/very natural to translate the dialogue as “Salah seorang Menteri berpidato degan sangat bagus”, dia menceritakan pada istrinya. “Kalau semua orang berkomitmmen seperti dia, kita akan mendapatkan Papua Barat sejak dulu”. Whereas, there are 46.3% student respondents who think that“Salah satu dari para pejabat sungguh memberikan pidato

yang bagus,” katanya pada istrinya. “Apabila semua pejabat melakukan seperti apa yang ia lakukan, tentu saja kita pasti sudah mendapatkan kembali Papua Nugini dari jauh –jauh hari” is an unnatural/ very unnatural translation. Grammatically, the second version of translation above is acceptable enough. However, it sounds so literal and formal for the ordinary people in their daily conversation.

Table 1.5 Dialogue 5:

“What a bastard! Hit and run!” ST

TT (Students‟ Translation)

A B C D E F G H I J K L

“Wh at a bast ard! “ke par at! Ta “Bren gsek! Habis memu “Das ar bajin gan! “Das ar bajin gan! “Beta pa kejiny a ! “Betapa Keparatny a orang itu! “Das ar bajin gan, “Or ang sial an! Dasa r bajin gan, “Ba jing an! Tab “Breng sek! Habs memuku “Sia lan! Suda h

(7)

55 Hit

and run! ”

bra k lari !”

kul lalu pergi! ”

Mena brak dan kabur !”

Tabr ak lari!”

Mena brak dan lari !”

Menabrak dan lari begitu saja!”

tabra k lari! ”

Tab rak lari! ”

tabra k lari !

rak lari !”

l terus

lari!” nabrak dan lari lgi!” The highest percentage of student respondents‟ response, i.e. 52.2% identify the student translator‟s translation for the dialogue 5 becomes“Betapa Keparatnya orang itu! Menabrak dan lari begitu saja!” is natural/very natural. While, 49.3% of student respondents consider that the most unnatural translation for the dialogue is “Brengsek! Habs memukul terus lari!”

The translation of “What a bastard!” is more closely equivalent to “Brengsek” instead of “Keparatnya orang itu” that sounds so literal. Likewise, “Hit and run!” is more closely equivalent to “menabrak dan lari begitu saja!”, yet it sounds so literal rather than “Habis memukul terus lari!”. Thus, it is not surprised if student respondents who consider the 1st translation version is not really significant in number.

Table 1.6 Dialogue 6:

“Call the police!” ST

TT (Students‟ Translation)

A B C D E F G H I J K L

“Cal l the polic e!”

“pan ggil polisi

“Pan ggil polisi !”

“Tele pon polisi !”

“Pan ggil polisi !”

“pan ggil polisi !”

“Pan ggil polisi !”

Pang gil polis i

“Pan ggil polisi !”

“Pan ggil polisi !” The highest percentage or 83.6% of student respondents think that the most natural translation of “Call the police!”is“Panggil polisi!”. There are only two versions of translation, yet the student respondents are not consistent in assessing the naturalness of the translations that cause variations in number of percentage.

It is very common/natural for Indonesian people to use both “Panggil polisi!” and “Telpon polisi!” in their daily conversation, although it looks literal as well. Not surprisingly, if the number of student respondents who think the translation is natural are very significant.

Table 1.7 Dialogue 7:

“Don’t move him!” ST

TT (Students‟ Translation)

A B C D E F G H I J K L

“D on’t mov e him !”

“jan gan gera kkan dia”

“Jang an pinda hkan dia!”

“Jang an gerakk an tubuhn ya!”

“Jang an pinda hkan dia !”

“Jang an pinda hkan dia!”

“Jang an pinda hkan tubuh nya!”

“Jang an pinda hkan dia!”

Jang an gera kan tubu hnya

“Jan gan pind ah dia! ”

“Jang an pinda hkan dia!”

“Jang an pinda hkan dia!” 70.1% of student respondents consider that the most natural Indonesian translation version of

“Don’t move him!” is “Jangan pindahkan dia!”. Actually 8 out of 12 student translators translated the dialogue in the same way, “Jangan pindahkan dia!”, yet the percentage is different due to the student respondents‟ inconsistency in assessing the naturalness of translation. On the other hand, there are two versions of translation that have got similar percentage, though they were translated in a different way become “jangan gerakkan dia” and “Jangan gerakkan tubuhnya!”. Both translations are considered by the student respondent as unnatural/very unnatural.

Similar with the translation of dialogue 6, both “jangan pindahkan dia!” and “jangan gerakkan dia” seem so literal in translation. However, Indonesian speakers in general are more likely to say “jangan pindahkan dia” or “jangan dipindahkan” rather than “jangangerakkan dia.”

(8)

56 Table 1.8 Dialogue 8:

“God, what a mess! He’s really bleeding!” ST

TT (Students‟ Translation)

A B C D E F G H I J K L

“Go d, what a mess ! He’s reall y bleed ing!”

“ya tuhan, meng erikan ! Dia meng alami penda rahan parah ”

“Ya Tuha n! Dia benar benar berda rah!”

“Ast aga, beta pa para hnya ! Dia bena r-bena r terlu ka!”

“Ya Tuhan, betapa kejamn ya! Ia banyak mengel uarkan darah! ”

“Astag a, betapa kacaun ya ! Dia benar – benar mengal ami pendar ahan !”

“ya Tuhan , betap a meng erikan ! Dia benar -benar berda rah!”

“Tuh an, betap a keja mnya ! Ia bercu curan dara h!”

“Tuh an, benar -benar kaca u! Dia sung guh berda rah!”

Tuha n, alang kah keja mnya ! Ia bercu curan dara h

“Ya Tuh an! Ia berd arah ban yak seka li!”

“Ya Tuh an, kac au! Dia ber dar ah! ”

“Astag a, betapa parahn ya ini! Dia benar-benar pendar ahan!”

For 59.7% student respondents, the most unnatural translation version of “God, what a mess!

He’s really bleeding!” is Tuhan, alangkah kejamnya! Ia bercucuran darah. Likewise, thereare 58.2% student respondents who think that “Tuhan, benar-benar kacau! Dia sungguh berdarah!” is the second most unnatural version of translation. There are only 52.2% of student respondents who consider “ya tuhan, mengerikan! Dia mengalami pendarahan parah” as the most natural version among the available translation.

The use of “Tuhan” as the Indonesian translation of exclamation “God” sounds so literal. For Indonesian people, to show their strong annoyance, the use of “Astaga (firullah)” is more common than “Tuhan” or “Ya Tuhan”, especially in a very informal situation.

Table 1.9 Dialogue 9:

“I’d kill that bastard if ever met him again!” ST

TT (Students‟ Translation)

A B C D E F G H I J K L

“I’d kill that bast ard if ever met him agai n!”

“aku akan bunu h bajin gan itu, kala u berte mu lagi”

“Ak u aka n mem bun uh oran g itu jika kete mu! ”

“Aka n aku bunu h bajin gan itu jika aku berte mu dia lagi! ”

“Aku akan membu nuh bajinga n itu jika bertem u lagi dengan nya!”

“Aku akan membu nuh sialan itu jika aku menem uinya lagi !”

“aka n kubu nuh si kepa rat itu jika aku berte mu dia lagi! ”

“Aku akan memb unuh bajing an itu jika aku berte mu denga nnya lagi!”

“Ak an kubu nuh dia kala u kete mu lagi! ”

Aku akan memb unuh bajing an itu seand ainya bertem u denga nnya lagi.

“Ak u akan bunu h oran g itu bila bert emu lagi! ”

“Ak u akan mem bun uh oran g itu jika kete mu! ”

“Aku akan bunu h orang sialan itu kalau aku berte mu lagi!”

77.6% of student respondents think that the most natural one is “Aku akan membunuh bajingan itu jika aku bertemu dengannya lagi!” as the Indonesian translation of dialogue 9.There are only 37.3% of student respondents who think that “Aku akan membunuh bajingan itu seandainya bertemu dengannya lagi” as the most unnatural translation version for the dialogue.

Although most student think that the first translation above is natural/very natural, yet the expression still looks literal, especially for the clause “Aku akan membunuh” that sounds so awkward

(9)

(formal) in an informal situation. Indonesian people would prefer to use “Akan kubunuh” instead of “Aku akan membunuh.”

Table 1.10 Dialogue 10:

“What does he think we are, just because he owns a car? Dogs?” ST

TT (Students‟ Translation)

A B C D E F G H I J K L

“Wh at does he think we are, just beca use he own s a car? Dog s?”

“dia piker dia siapa , hany a karen a memi liki mobil . Anjin g?”

“Dia pikir kita siapa , hany a karen a dia memi liki mobil ? Anjin g?”

“Dia piker siapa kita, hanya karen a dia pemili k mobil nya? Anjin g?

“Dia pikir kita apa, hanya karena dia memp unyai mobil? Anjing ?”

“Dia pikir apa kita ini, hany a karen a dia memi liki mobil ? Anjin g?”

“dia pikir kita apa, hany a kare na dia puny a mobi l? Anjin g-anjin g?”

“Mere ka pikir kita apa, hanya karena ia memp unyai mobil? Anjing ?”

“Mer eka pikir kita ini apa, hany a karen a dia puny a mobil ? Anjin g?”

Mere ka pikir kita apa, hany a karn a ia mem puny ai mobi l? Anji ng?

“Dia pikir kita siapa ?, hany a karen a ia puny a mobil ? Anjin g?”

“Dia pikir kita siapa , hany a karen a dia naik mobil ? Anjin g?”

“Dia pikir kita ini siapa , hany a karen a dia puny a mobil ? Anjin g?” 64.2% of student respondents consider the translation of the dialogue becomes “Dia pikir

kita siapa, hanya karena dia memiliki mobil? Anjing?” are natural/very natural. However, there are also 64.2% of them consider the translation becomes “dia piker dia siapa, hanya karena memiliki

mobil. Anjing?”is unnatural/very unnatural. Thus, the percentage of responses toward the natural and unnatural of translation are balanced.

Both translation versions are too faithful to English grammatical structure. Therefore, they sound so literal in one hand and unnatural on the other hand. Indonesian conversants in general would use “Dia anggap apa kita” rather than “Dia pikir kita siapa.” Similarly, native Indonesian speaker would prefer using “hanya (apa) karena dia punya mobil” instead of “hanya karena dia memiliki mobil.” The use of “memiliki” is too formal in this context.

Table 1.11 Dialogue 11:

“Did anyone get his number?” ST

TT (Students‟ Translation)

A B C D E F G H I J K L

“Di d any one get his num ber? ”

“ad a yan g tah u plat no mor nya ?”

“Ada yang meng ingat plat nomo rnya? ”

“Apa kah ada orang yang melih at plat nomo rnya? ”

“Adaka h seseora ng yang mendap at nomor plat mobilny a?”

“Ada kah seseo rang mend apatk an nomo rnya? ”

“adak ah yang mend apatk an plat nome rnya? ”

“Ada kah seseo rang mend apatk an nomo r platny a?”

“Ada kah yang melih at nomo r polisi nya? ”

Adak ah seseo rang mend apatk an nomo r platny a?

“Adak ah yang meliha t nomor kendar aanya? ”

“Ad a yan g hafa l plat nom orny a?”

“Apa kah ada yang ingat plat nomo rnya? ” There are 65.7% of student respondents think that the most natural translation made by student translators for the dialogue is“Ada yang mengingat plat nomornya?” Whereas, 56.7% student

(10)

respondent think that the most unnatural translation made by student for the dialogue is “Adakah

seseorang mendapatkan nomornya?”.

Although “Adakah seseorang mendapatkan nomornya” is grammatically acceptable, yet it sounds more literal than “Ada yang mengingat plat nomornya?”. However, it is better to change word order of the phrase “plat nomornya” into “nomor platnya” in accordance with Indonesian structure.

Table 1.12 Dialogue 12:

“Too dark. Couldn’t see a damn thing.” ST

TT (Students‟ Translation)

A B C D E F G H I J K L

“Too dark. Coul dn’t see a dam n thing .”

“terl alu gela p. Tak bisa meli hat”

“Ter lalu gela p. Tida k dapa t meli hat plat nya. ”

“Sa ngat gela p. Tida k bisa meli hatn ya.”

“Terl alu gelap . Aku tidak dapat melih at apap un.”

“Terla lu gelap. Tidak dapat meliha tnya!”

“terl alu gelap . Tidak dapat melih at apap un.”

“Terlal u gelap. Tidak dapat melihat hal yang buruk. ”

“Ter lalu gela p. Tida k bisa meli hat apa-apa. ”

Terlal u gelap, untuk dapat meliha t hal yang buruk.

“Terl alu gelap. Aku tidak bisa melih atnya. ”

“Terl alu gelap . Tidak terlih at.”

“Terl alu gelap . Tidak bisa melih at apap un.”

77.6% student respondents think that “Terlalu gelap. Tidak dapat melihat hal yang buruk.”is the most unnatural translation version made by student translators for dialogue 12. Almost equal with that, 74.6% of student respondents think that it is very unnatural in Indonesian expression to say “Terlalu gelap, untuk dapat melihat hal yang buruk.” Whereas, 64.2% of student respondents think that the most natural way to translate the expression is“Terlalu gelap. Aku tidak bisa melihatnya.”

The failure of the first and the second translation versions above to be natural is because students translate the expression too literal.

Table 1.13 Dialogue 13:

“There’ll be a second revolution if things keep going like this.” ST

TT (Students‟ Translation)

A B C D E F G H I J K L

“There ’ll be a second revoluti on if things keep going like this.”

“aka nada revol uis kedua jika hal sepert i ini terus terjad i”

“Akan ada revolu si kedua jika masih ada kejadi an sepert i ini.”

“Aka n ada revol usi kedua jika tetap sepert i ini.”

“Past i akan ada revolu si kedua jika segal a hal berjal an sepert i ini.”

“aka n terjad i revol usi kedua jika hal sepert i ini terus terjad i”

“Akan ada revolus i kedua jika hal seperti ini terulan g kembal i.”

“Akan terjadi revolusi kedua jika keadaan nya berjalan seperti ini terus.”

“Akan ada revolu si kedua apabil a hal sepert i ini tetap terjadi .”

“Akan da revolu si kedua jika masih ada kejadi an sepert i ini.”

“Akan ada revolus i kedua kalau hal-hal seperti ini tetap dibiark an terjadi. ” 70.1% student respondents consider “akan terjadi revolusi kedua jika hal seperti ini terus

(1)

Dialogue 8:

“God, what a mess! He’s really bleeding!”