23 check the acceptability of the translation of the plaques. In this part, the researcher
explains how the theories are used to check if the translation is acceptable. The researcher uses the theory proposed by Larson 1984 to check the
accuracy, clarity, and the naturalness of the plaques. The researcher makes a rubric helped by the expert to evaluate the translation. The accuracy will be tested
by comparing the SL text to the TL text and naturalness checking. In comparing the TL text, the researcher will do it herself, while the naturalness checking will
be done by asking the expert and the researcher herself. The last testing proposed by Larson 1984 is checking the naturalness, the
researcher will use the naturalness tests. The naturalness checking is to check the naturalness and the accuracy of the bilingual plaques. The researcher and the
expert will look for the weird words or sentences found in the text. The words and the sentences will be marked and analyzed further.
24
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter includes research method, research setting, research subject, research instrument and data gathering technique, data analysis technique, and
research procedure.
A. Research Method
The research was under qualitative data method. According to Strauss and Corbin 1997, “qualitative data analysis is a search for general statements about
relationships and underlying themes; it builds grounded theory” as cited in Marshall and Rossman, 2006, p. 154. The data were obtained from the bilingual
plaques in Fort Vredeburg Museum and some related literatures were linked to the data. The bilingual plaques were taken from Diorama I. The research was aimed
to find the acceptability of the bilingual plaques using Larson’s meaning-based theory.
Then, the method of this research is document analysis. According to Fraenkel, Wallen, and Hyun 2015, “content or document analysis is a technique
that enables researchers to study human behavior in an indirect way, through an analysis of their communication” p. 476. The comparison of the texts, both in
the source language and the target language, were analyzed to find the acceptability of the plaques.
25
B. Research Setting
The data were collected twice on 14 September 2015 and 20 September 2015 in Fort Vredeburg Museum. The data were obtained by taking pictures of the
plaques. The researcher decided to use only ten plaques out of forty-eight and they were taken from Diorama I. The researcher was focusing on the non-random
sampling and the plaques chosen were from Prince Diponegoro era until Japanese colonial in Indonesia. There was no special permission needed to take the pictures
since it is a public place and the plaques are categorized as the public documents.
C. Research Subject
The researcher and Fort Vredeburg museum plaques act as the subject of the research. The data are obtained by the researcher and the data analysis is done
by the researcher. The testing is conducted by the researcher to find the acceptability of the plaques. Moreover, the researcher was actively participated on
the research process.
D. Instruments and Data Gathering Technique
The data were collected from Fort Vredeburg museum. The researcher did not need a special permission to get in on the museum. Moreover, the researcher
need not ask a permission to take pictures of the plaques because the plaques were public documents. The main research instrument for this research was the
researcher, the document, and the rubric. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
26
1. Human
The instrument of this research is human or the researcher herself. Larson 1984, p. 489, proposed some criteria for the researcher on translation. The first is
the researcher should know both languages. The second is the researcher should be able to write in the target language. Lastly, the researcher should have the
academic background of the translation studies. The plaques mainly contain two languages which are Indonesia source language and English target language,
but some plaques used Japanese and Javanese terms. Since the research focused on the translation between English and Indonesian, the terms in Japanese and
Javanese were ignored. The researcher knows and able to write on both languages; English and Indonesian. In terms of educational background, the researcher is the
student at the English Language Education Study Program, which enables the researcher to communicate fluently in English.
2. Documents
The documents are obtained from Fort Vredeburg museum plaques and there are forty-eight of them. The plaques used are the plaques in Diorama I and
there are ten plaques. The documents consist of some information about the scene presented. The document on the museum plaques contain both source and target
language which are Indonesia and English. Some plaques contain Javanese and Japanese terms, but they will be ignored.
3. Rubric
The rubric was made by the researcher and helped by an expert in translation. The rubric itself is a combination of some theories of translation, but
27 the most used theories are the meaning-based translation theory proposed by
Larson 1984 and a translation criteria proposed by Machali 2000. Those theories are combined into a scoring rubric to judge the translation. It contains
clarity, naturalness, and accuracy category and the total score of it will determine the translation criteria.
E. Data Analysis Technique
In analyzing the data, the research used a theory proposed by Larson which has four steps. This step was the important part of this research. By taking
this step, the acceptability of the plaques would be known. First, the researcher retyped the texts from the plaques. Second, the findings were analyzed and
classified using the meaning-based translation theory proposed by Larson. The theory is about the translation testing which consist of comparing the source text,
back-translating into the source language, comprehension checks, naturalness and readability testing, and consistency checks. According to Larson 1984, a good
translation is a translation which is clear, natural, and accurate, and based on the theory the researcher only used three steps; clarity checking, naturalness checking
and accuracy checking. To check the acceptability, an acceptability rubric was made by the researcher based on some theories and helped by the expert in
translation. In this rubric, the researcher suggested three criteria based on Larson 1984, p. 17, namely clarity, naturalness, and accuracy. Besides, there are four
scores for each criteria, namely idiomatic, near idiomatic, modified literal, and very literal.
