14 translation equivalence. The next part concerns with further theories related to the
terms that will be used in analyzing part of this research, namely culture-specific terms, which include categories of cultural words, and translation procedure,
which are limited to Newmark’s and Vinay and Darbelnet’s models only. Subsequently, the culture-specific terms are described, in which it encompassed
two sections, namely the definition of culture-specific terms and the categories of culture-specific terms. Afterwards, translation procedures are also described in
two sections, namely the definition of translation procedures and the types of translation procedures as proposed by Newmark and Vinay and Darbelnet.
1. Language, Translation, and Cross-cultural Communication
Translation, in this modern situation, is not merely about transferring meaning between texts from one language to another language. Based on Snell-
Hornby 1990, translation studies have moved from translation as text to as culture and politics. It is implied that translation has gone beyond the text itself –
there are several cultural and politic concerns to be taken into account in translation. Munday 2001: 125 also clarifies that comparisons between original
texts and the translations do not consider the text in its cultural environment. He adds that translation goes beyond language and focuses on the interaction between
translation and culture, on an account where culture impacts and constrains translation, and on the issues of context, history and conventions. Therefore,
culture has a major role in translation. In translation, understanding the culture is definitely a serious concern.
Therefore, to understand translation, it is necessary to understand culture.
15 Different places in the world may have different culture. Each culture has specific
differentiator to differentiate to other cultures. Furthermore, certain culture is differentiated from another culture by language. As Katan 1999: 75 states that
the key to cultural reality was in the lexicon, it is implied that words of a language are what differentiate cultures. Language itself could be understood with reference
to a context of culture Malinowski, 1923. He also states that language is essentially rooted in the reality of culture.
In the light of culture, language must be explained with constant reference. A language could only be understood when these two contexts
implicitly or explicitly clear to the addressee or interlocutors. Therefore, the role of translation is to make the source text ST comprehensible to the target text
TT readers by providing them context. According to Malmkjaer 2005: 10, the relationship between the linguistic form and the referent shows that “language
does not put names on things, but on concepts.” It reflects that the meaning of word is conceptual-based. In the light of culture, it represents some concepts that
exist in certain culture. The problem is some concepts may exist in one culture but some may not exist in other cultures. Therefore, the meaning of certain words in
one culture cannot be transferred into other culture’s word directly. Jakobson 2004: 139 explains that the problem of equivalence in meaning between words
in different language, as a differentiator of culture, happens because there is ordinarily no full equivalence between code-units. For example, the word gotong
royong, a tradition to work together within a society in Indonesia, has no
16 equivalence in English, and the word joglo, a traditional type of house in Javanese
tradition, has no equivalence in English as well.
a. Type of translation
There are several types of translation. Catford 1965:20-26 differentiates them based on extent, level, and rank. He defines translation, as
follow: 1.
Full vs. Partial Translation. This distinction relates to the extent of SL text which is submitted to the
translation process. In a full translation, the entire text is submitted to the translation process, which means all part of the SL text is replaced by the TL
material. In a partial translation, some part or parts of the SL text are left untranslated. It is common to have this kind of treatment in most literary
translation. 2.
Total vs. Restricted Translation This distinction relates to the language involved in the translation. Total
translation is best defined as the replacement of SL grammar and lexis by equivalent TL grammar and lexis, which may result in replacement of SL sounds
or spellings by non-equivalent TL sounds or spellings. On the other hand, restricted translation is defined as the replacement of SL textual material by
equivalent TL textual material at only one level. It implies that translation is performed only at the phonology the sounds or the spellings, or only at one level
between grammar and lexis.
17 3.
Rank of Translation The third type of differentiation in translation relates to the rank in a
grammatical or phonological hierarchy at which translation equivalence is established. In normal total translation, the grammatical units between which
translation equivalences can be at any rank, while in a long text, the ranks where translation equivalences occur are constantly changing. It can be sentence-to-
sentence, group-to-group, word-to-word, etc. The popular terms free, literal, and word-for-word translation also partly
correlate with this distinction. A free translation is always unbounded between larger units than the sentence. A word-for-word translation generally means what
it says; it is essentially at word-rank. A literal translation may start from a word- for-word translation, but it makes changes in TL grammar. An example adopting
Catford 1965: 26 can be seen below: SL text
Siapa nama Anda? TL text
1 Who name of yours? Word-for-word
2 Who is your name? Literal
3 What is your name? Free
The relation between free, literal, and word-for-word translation can be seen as written above. Word-for-word translation performed in word rank, literal
translation performed in a higher level of word-for-word translation by the change in grammar; while free translation seeks further than any rank beforehand.
On the other hand, based on the purpose of translation, Brislin 1976: 3- 4 categorizes translation into these following types:
