designed to justify a modification of the source language message, but to facilitate its reproduction in a different form, and in its fullest and most accurate sense.
Similar to Nida’s statement, Nababan 2008 defines three strategies as the possibilities to solve problems of equivalence: addition of information, deletion of
information, and structural adjustment. Moreover, Nida 2003: 226 writes the purposes of these strategies as
follows: 1 permit adjustment of the form of the message to the requirements of the structure of the receptor language; 2 produce semantically equivalent
structures; 3 provide equivalent stylistic appropriateness; and 4 carry an equivalent communication load.
a. Additions
There are several experts’ statements related to additions as translation strategy. Baker 1992: 86 says:
Differences in the gra mmatical structures of the source and target languages often result in some changes in the information content of the
message during the process of translation. This change may take the form of adding to the target text information which is not expressed in the
source text. This can happen when the target language has a grammatical category which the source language lacks.
Baker explains that the change may take the form of adding to the target text information which is not expressed in the source language, if the target language
has the grammatical category which the source language lacks. According to Nida 2003: 227, there are so many types of additions which
may be employed in the process of translating. The most common and important
are: filling out elliptical expressions; obligatory specification; additions required by grammatical restructuring; and amplification from implicit to explicit status.
Furthermore, Nida 2003: 230-231, emphasizes that although the above techniques involves
“additions”, it is important to recognize that there has been no actual adding to the semantic content of the message, for these additions consist
essentially in making explicit what is implicit in the source language text. Simply changing some element in the message from implicit to explicit status does not
add meaning to the content; it simply change the manner in which the information is communicated. There are four kinds of additions:
1 Filling out elliptical expression An elliptical construction is one in which a word or phrase implied by
context is omitted from a sentence, because it is a repetition of a preceding word or phrase. In addition, according to
Webster
’s
New World College Dictionary
1996: 441, elliptical ellipsis is the omission of a word or words necessary for complete grammatical construction but understood in the
context. Nida 2003: 227 writes that although ellipsis occurs in all languages,
the p articular structures which permit such “omitted” words are by no means
identical from language to language. Although an elliptical expression is almost used in one language, an ellipsis may not be permitted in another.
For examples: a
SL: “He is greater than I” TL:
“
He is greater than I am great
”. Nida 2003: 227
The clause in target language is filled by elliptical construction
‘
am great
’ to emphasize that the subject ‘
I
’ is also great but not as great as
‘
He
’. b
SL: Deborah leads a very easy life and always has breakfast in bed. TL:
Hidup Deborah sangat santai dan ia selalu makan pagi di tempa t
tidur.
Widyamarta 1989: 109 In the source language English, there is no need to add the
pronoun ‘she’ in the sentence. The reader will understand that the actor is
Deborah. However, the target language is the opposite. It is necessary to add the word
‘
ia
’ in order to emphasize that the person who ‘always has
breakfast in bed’ is Deborah. 2 Obligatory specifications
Nida 2003: 228 writes that obligatory specification requires in some translations results from one of two reasons: a ambiguity in the receptor
language formations and b the fact that greater specificity may be required so as to avoid misleading reference.
