An Investigation of Librarians’ Translating Ability: A Case Study at an Indonesian University.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS xii

LIST OF TABLES xiii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS xv

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Introduction .. ……… 1

1.2. Purpose of the Study ...……….. ………... 4

1.3. Research Questions …….……… ……… 4

1.4. Significance of the Study ….………. 6

1.5. Assumptions ……….. 7

1.6. Clarification of Terms ……… 8

1.7. Organizatiuon of the Study ……….. 10

CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 2.1. Introduction ……… 11

2.2. Translation Theories: Equivalence-based and Skopos ..…….….…. 12

2.2.1. Equivalence-based Theory …….………... 12

2.2.2. Skopos Theory ………..………. 21

2.4. Difficulties Encountered in Translating ………. 26

2.4.1. Influence of SL properties……… 26

2.4.2. Cultural Barriers ……….. 29

2.4.3. Linguistic Difficulties ……….. 30

2.4.4. Irrelevant Issues of Rhetorical Features……… 33

2.4.5. The Problem of Form and Content ………. 34

2.5. Skills Needed in Translation ……… 36

2.6. Methods of Translation ………. 45

2.7. The Process of Translation ………. 49

2.8. Implications of the Theories to the Strategies Employed ……….. 50

2.9. The Criteria for Translating ……….……….. 52

2.10. Solutions to the Problems of Translating ………. 56

2.10.1. Addition or Removal of Meaning ……… 56

2.10.2. Sources of Insufficiency ……… 57

2.10.3. Theories and Rules Violated ……… 58

2.10.4. Compromising and Compensating ……… 59

2.10.5. Cultural Context………... 61

2.11. Difficulty versus Mandatory ……….. 66

2.12. Summary ……… 67

vi

CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY

3.1. Introduction ……… 70

3.2. Method of Research……… 71

3.2.1. The Instruments and Informants ………. 72

3.2.2. Access to the Site ……….……….. 74

3.2.3. The Role of the Researcher ……… 75

3.2.4. Research Phases ……….. ..……… 76

3.3. Techniques of Collecting the Data ………... 77

3.3.1. Research Question 1 ……… 77

3.3.2. Research Question 2 ……… 80

3.3.3. Research Question 3 ……… 81

3.4. Data Analysis ………... 85

CHAPTER IV. THE FINDINGS 4.1. Introduction ……… 88

4.2. The Informants’ General Ability of Translating ………. 89

4.3. Difficulties in Translating ……. ……… 97

4.3.1. Linguistic and Cultural Differences ………... 98

4.3.2. Restructuring the Source Text ………... 99

4.3.3. Incomplete Knowledge of the Source Language and Target Language ……….. 100

4.3.4. Intimate Acquaintance with Subject Matter ……… ……. 101

4.3.5. Effective Empathy with the Original Author and Content ... 102

4.3.6. Stylistic Facility in the Receptor Language ……….. 103

4.4. The Translations ……….104

4.4.1. Insufficiency for the Target Text ……….. 105

4.4.2. Inaccurate Meaning in the Target Text ……….. 105

4.4.3. Writing at the Author’s Linguistic Level (Emphasizing on the SL More Than at the Readership’s) ………. 107

4.4.4. Constructing a New Reader (with Different Textual Expectations and Cultural Knowledge from the Translators’) ………. 108

4.4.5. The Translators’ Bias (Omission or Alteration) …………... 104

4.5. Readability in the target Language ……….... 109

4.5.1. The Missing Part in the Target Text ……….. 111

4.5.2. Different Translating Abilities …………... 111

4.5.3. Explorative Informants (3) 1, 3, and 6 As Compared to Inferior Informants (7) 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 ………. 120

4.5.4. Compromising with the Source Text ……… 132

4.5.5. Flexibility ………. 134

4.5.6. Lacking in Intuitive Empathy ……….. 135

4.6. Observations on the Informants’ Strength and Weaknesses …….. 136

4.6.1. Following Unpredictable Turns ………138

4.6.1.1. Following Unpredictable Thought ………..…. 138

4.6.1.2. Following Unpredictable Nuances ……… 139

4.6.1.3. Following Unpredictable Subtleties ……….. 139

4.6.2. Writing the Language Imprecisely and Inaccurately ………140

4.6.3. The Methods Employed ………141

4.6.3.1. Primarily Semantic ……… 141

4.6.3.2. Secondarily Communicative ………. 142

4.6.4. Accuracy, Clarity, Naturalness ………... 143

4.6.4.1. Accuracy ……….. 143

4.6.4.2. Clarity ……….. 144

4.6.4.3. Naturalness ……….. 145

4.6.4.4. Untranslatability ……….. 146

4.7. The Translators’ Profiles ………... 147

4.8. The Translations Reflecting the Informants’ Abilities ………….. 160

4.8.1. Misunderstandings of Certain Words, Phrases, and Sentences .. 160

4.8.1.1. Words ………... 161

4.8.1.2. Phrases ……… 162

4.8.1.3. Sentences ………. 163

4.9. The Process of Translating ……… 164

4.9.1. The Translations of the Abstract ………. 162

4.9.3. The Translations of the Summary and Conclusions …………... 167

4.10. The Overall Picture of the Librarians’ Translating Abilities ……168

4.11. The Common Thread of the Translating Abilities ………... 168

4.12. Unexercised Skills ………... 169

4.13. Evidence of Insufficiency of Meaning ………. 170

4.14. Meanings Insufficiency ……… 172

4.15. Readership’s Expectation ………. 180

4.16. Tracks of Attempts to Translate Hard Written Expressions …… 189

4.17. The L1 Ideas Involved ………. 191

4.17.1. Unfamiliar Words ……… 191

4.17.2. The Second Language Intent ………... 192

4.18. Pragmatic Equivalence………... 194

4.19. Translation Methods Frequently Employed………. 190

4.20. The Total Frequency ………... 199

4.20.1. Being Compromising ………200

4.20.2. Being Flexible ……….. 200

4.20.3. Being Relatively Close to the Readership’s Expectations …... 201

4.21. Typical Insufficiency of Meaning ………... 201

CHAPTER V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

5.1. Summary ………. 203

5.2. Conclusions ………. 205

5.3. Limitations of the Study ……….. 207

5.4. Implications ………. 207

5.5. Recommendations for Further Research ……… 209

BIBLIOGRAPHY………212

APPENDICES

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Illustration page

1. The equivalences ………..………... 17

2. A map of the concept of skopos theory ………. 21

3. The methods of translation ………... 46

4. The process of translation ………. 49

5. Translation strategies with a ‘top-down’ procedure ... 95

xii

LIST OF TABLES

Table page

1. Five Difficulties of Achieving Equivalences ………... 31

2. Components of Translation Skills ………..……… 37

3. Context-based Meanings of the Word Present ………... 39

4. Sentences Using Non-Idiomatic Phrases ……… 40

5. Sentences with Rhetorical Structures……… 42

6. The Criteria of Translating Ability ………... 55

7. The Existing Skills ………... 147

8. The Skills Supposedly Acquired ………. 147

9. The Frequency of Supposedly Acquired Abilities During the Process of Translating ……… 169

10. Nine Components Supposedly Acquired with Their Degree of Frequency ……… 171

11. Insufficient Meanings Due to the Failure of Exercising Component 11 ………... 172

12. Insufficient Meanings Due to the Failure of Exercising Component 7 …..……… 173

13. Insufficient Meanings Due to the Failure of Exercising Component 9 ……..……. 174

14. Insufficient Meanings Due to the Failure of Exercising Component 6 …..………. 175

15. Insufficient Meanings Due to the Failure of Exercising Component 10 …..……... 176

16. Insufficient Meanings Due to the Failure of Exercising Component 7 …..………. 177

18. Insufficient Meanings Due to the Failure of Exercising Component 5 …….……. 179 19. Insufficient Meanings Due to the Failure of Exercising Component 6 …..……… 180 20. Words or Phrases Wrongly-Transferred and Their Potential Insufficiency of

Meanings ………..…… 190 21. Frequency of the “P” Equivalence Achieved ……….. 195 22. Frequency of the Methods Employed ……….. 197 23. Typical Inability of Translating Leading to the Insufficiency of Meaning ………. 199 24. The Elements of Typicality ………. 201

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1. Introduction

This study is concerned with investigating an Indonesian university librarians’ ability of translating journal article from English into Indonesian. These librarians assume the responsibility of translating as one of their daily activities. This qualitative case study research involves 10 selected librarians working at Indonesia University of Education. Since translating is problematic and involves intercultural spirit (Whitfield, 2007: 27)), translations produced by these librarians are worth discussing. Part of the reason is that the librarians are responsible for catering library users to various kinds of newest information including acceptable translations. Library users including faculty members and students should find the translations readable and useful. Readability here would refer to translations easy to understand on the target readers’ part. This study attempts to answer questions related to translating as the process, and translation as the product. Empirical evidence from recent research (Baorong, 2009:11; Nababan, 2003: 55; 2007:213-215; Watson, 2004; Listyo, 2007) indicates that translating is a difficult task to accomplish.

The present study investigates a university librarians’ ability in translating a selected text of English journal article on Psychology into Indonesian. Specifically, it seeks information about translations produced by the librarians, methods used, difficulties encountered, and impact the

to accommodate meanings. In translating the given text, these librarians attempt to produce near flawless translations: accurate, clear and natural (hereafter ACN). They tend to be faithful to the source text (hereafter ST) and emphasize more on the source language (hereafter SL) than to the target language (hereafter TL). They seem to find it difficult to compare and transmit two different systems of language and culture simultaneously (Balasko, 2006:59; Suh, 2006:17). This phenomenon gives room for an investigation. Analysis on their work in translating is based on four types of translation errors – pragmatic translation errors, cultural translation errors, linguistic translation errors, text-specific translation errors (Nord, 1997:75-76), the criteria of translating ability (Bell, 1999:27), and the ability (Sofer, 1996) they are supposed to acquire. Two theories of translation, namely equivalence-based and skopos are applied in the discussion. The first theory deals with faithfulness while the later deals with purpose in the TL. One particular ability, adjusting, seems to play a greater role in applying the technique of coping with the wide range of purposes which translations might serve (Hatim and Munday, 2004: 43).

As will be discussed later, translations produced by the university librarians show some inaccuracy, unintelligibility and unnaturalness. Part of the reason is that the librarians tend to apply semantic translation method more than communicative translation method. This phenomenon results in somewhat less flawless translation. As professionals, they are supposed to be responsible for catering all kinds of library users to various reliable sources of information (Seefeldt and Syre, 2003; Scepanski, 2007). Many of these sources are scholarly journal articles written in English. Meanwhile, not all library users in Indonesia can understand English well (Nababan, 2003:147-148). Drawn from this fact, the role of librarians in translating to cater the library users to the latest issues of a certain field of study is of paramount importance. The

translations produced have to fulfill the readership community’s needs. This is also in line with the Government of Indonesia’s policy that translating is mandatory for university librarians (Perpusnas RI – Indonesia National Library, 2004). Each article translated is worth 3.5 credit points. These credit points are accumulated for the librarians’ promotion to a higher rank towards their career development. As a linguistic activity, translating actually provides the librarians with an opportunity to communicate thoughts with the writers of journal articles: replacing textual material in the SL by equivalent textual material in the TL.

In translating the given text, these librarians apply procedures and methods in a way that risks flawed translations. A model of translation process should be in the hands of the translators when performing their translating ability: analysis, transfer, and restructuring (Hatim and Mason, 2004: 160). As translators, they are also supposed to call for individuals who have complete knowledge of both texts: the source text and the target text (hereafter TT, and throughout the accounts, these ST and TT are established). They should have intimate acquaintance with subject matter, effective empathy with the original author and content, and stylistic facility in the TL (Nida, 1964). The librarians’ ability in translating English into Indonesian is important to be discussed. This importance has led the researcher’s interest to investigate what happens during the process of translating, what methods are used, how acceptable are the produced translations to the target readers, and what impact the translations have on the readership. Among the issues to address in the present study include reading and writing abilities, reasonableness on the part of the target readers, and linguistic as well as cultural differences between the two languages under investigation.

1.2. Purpose of the study

The general purpose of this study was to investigate the ability of university librarians in preserving the meaning of an original English text when it is translated into Indonesian. The methods used and the difficulties encountered during the process of translating are other interesting issues to investigate. Process and product are of the main concern of the study incorporating both the theories approached namely the equivalence-based and the skopos or scopos theories.

The present study is to identify and describe the experience of comparing and transmitting two different systems of English and Indonesian languages and their cultures simultaneously, and the impact it has on the readers. This linguistic activity of translating – communicating thoughts with writers of articles – brings with it some consequences. When providing the users with the information they need, these subject librarians have to give access to various sources of information – one form of which is Indonesian translated work of articles on a specific discipline. Although these professionals have some similarity in terms of their background, the translations they produce may differ from one another (Nababan, 2007:213). The communication which may result in accuracy, clarity and naturalness (CAN) in the form of translated texts is worth discussing. This ACN is one essential element since the prospective readership should find the written translation useful and eventually benefit from it.

1.3. Research Questions

Components of translating abilities (Sofer, 1996; Bell, 1999) will be used to explore the produced translations (House, 1997). Discussions that follow will include: (1) observing the

efforts the librarians made to transfer written expressions found in the ST as an independent entity; (2) describing the procedures and methods employed in coping with the untranslatability on the part of the text; (3) identifying how the methods work to achieve equivalences – cultural risk-free reproduction in the TT; (4) categorizing the difficulties when producing the translations; and (5) describing the overall performance of the librarians in translating through the informants’ profiles – communicative competence, and the impact on the target readers’ part.

To meet the research goals outlined above, the following questions have guided the inquiry:

1. How closely did the librarians preserve the meaning and quality of the ST? 2. Which translation methods were used to achieve relative equivalences? 3. What difficulties did the librarians encounter in translating the text?

Research Question 1 focuses on three main features of acceptableness namely accuracy, clarity and naturalness. It also deals with translatability, untranslatability and the effects of adding or removing without distorting the message transmitted on the readership. Research Question 2 focuses on equivalence theory and how it is achieved as compared with the skopos theory . Research Question 3 deals with identifying difficulties when attempts to produce flawless translations take place: readability on the target reader’s part, reasonableness, and acceptableness. Impact on the audience will discuss the acceptableness and reasonableness on the target readers’ part: the expectation of the readers to understand and eventually benefit from the translations.

1.4. Significance of the Study

This study is significant in that it can contribute to the literatures of translating and translation. The results of the study will eventually provide some evidence of phenomenon which in turn would inspire an academic community of the university librarians to intensify the activity of translating a journal article with some flawlessness. Theoretically, the study may contribute to a concept of encouraging potential librarians working at an academic library as one crucial human resource: identification of translating ability leading to a linguistic new paradigm of translating, especially, written expressions. From a practical point of view, the results of the study can provide information on the practice of translating, change the thinking patterns of the professionals under discussion, enhance a higher motivation, and broaden their horizons by involving themselves in a more meaningful effort to produce near-flawless translations. The audience to cater – the library users: faculty members, students, researchers – will perceive some potential value of this study to at least lessen the possibility of questioning the legitimacy of the translations produced by the librarians, and be aware of translation flaws while at the same time making use of the work.

At least an attempt to reveal a phenomenon worth-developing has been initiated. Two theories of translation, namely Equivalence-based theory and the Skopos theory are put forward. Both theories have their own strengths and weaknesses as will be identified in Chapter Four. To researchers, this case study can contribute to further studies on the same topic in a recursive mode (Preissle, 1994), that is, being able to be used again with different subjects and with probably better parameters, more logical in sense, and broader in scope.

1.5. Assumptions

The researcher of the present study believes that assumptions are statements of which truth can be accepted to be the underlying concept or reference in the process of conducting research. For that reason, some assumptions are outlined below.

1. Translation is problematic. This phenomenon is conformed by the results of a study by Baorong (2009:2), Listyo (2007), and Nababan (2003:55; 2007:213) that pragmatic, cultural and text-specific translation errors are often due to the translators’ poor awareness of the purpose of the TT. Linguistic errors are generally attributable to the translators’ inadequate language competence representing deviation from standard target language paradigms and usages (Nord, 1997:75). Consequently, the meaning and the quality of the produced translation are to be investigated.

2. There is no such thing as a perfect or flawless translation (Newmark, 1988:188-190). In this regard, Reiss (2000) suggests that a TT of a pragmatic text should transmit the full conceptual content of an ST and produce the intended response in the target reader. While a perfect translation does not exist, some relative equivalence should be acceptable regardless of the methods and strategies applied. There is no absolute translation (Alwasilah, 1991: 9-25).

3. Translating is, for many translators, cumbersome (Kaur, 2006:24). Based on the researcher’s observation in the research site, it was obvious that most librarians found translating a difficult work. Translating a text from one language to another is a difficult task (Listyo, 2007). In one way or another, linguistic and semantic analyses (Nababan, 2003) were insufficiently involved when translating. In the practice of translating, the librarians might experience many difficulties especially when it came to providing the readers with near flawless translations. This phenomenon might bring with it some impact on their audience – the target readers: faculty members, students, and researchers. Two consequences are therefore possible: being accepted and being rejected.

1.6. Clarification of Terms

To minimize possible confusion, the recurring terms are defined to refer to their specific meanings as follows.

Translation refers to a message transferred from an ST to a TL. It deals with two different cultures at the same time with equivalence as the central issue. Equivalence is a procedure which replicates the same situation as in the original, whilst using completely different wording (Vinay and Darbelnet in Leonardi, 2000). It is established at a text level (Hatim and Mason, 1994), and is achieved either through equivalence-based theory or skopos theory. It is used here with the provision that although equivalence can be obtained to some extent, it is influenced by a variety of linguistic and cultural factors and is always relative.

Librarians refers to professionals for the transfer of all types of stored information and for dealing with the important raw material ‘knowledge’ through processing books and non-books materials. Their tasks of collecting, managing, indexing and cataloging, and acting as intermediary for books and other media make them professional partners in the media and information fields. Already today, and definitely much more in the future, they are navigators in the data networks; they make electronic information accessible and ensure its quality and relevance (Seefeldt & Syre, 2003). University subject librarians, especially, assume the responsibility for establishing academic collaboration with faculty members by among others providing access to information in the form of Indonesian translated work on a specific discipline.

Translating ability refers to understandings of words, phrases, and sentences in their complexities, by which the ability and its components are reflected through the translations produced. Demands on the translators’ part include the ability to grasp all the complexities (Schaffner, 2000:217) including, according to Nababan (2003:80), the roles the translators play (reading the ST, translating the ST, writing the ST in the TT, and reading in the TT). These roles involve skills exercised and a degree of competency as reflected by the quality of the translations. Other than ability, terms like skill and competence might be possible to be used interchangeably.

Journal refers to one kind of library collections written in English as an intellectual capital. The journal article in the field of Psychology ( Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation. Vol. 14 No.2, 2003 ) used in this study is scholarly in class and relatively recent in issues (See Appendix 2)

Text refers to the words of something written (Johns, 1997). There are distinctions between texts (“discourse without context”) and discourse (“text plus context”) (Connor, 1996). In this study, text and discourse are used interchangeably, referring always to what is written. The text, as defined here, is the focus of attention for the informants (i.e. the ‘translators’, the librarians) because it is the basic unit that carries meaning. The text chosen is the whole article of a journal. Translating the text, rather than translating languages, refers to the translator’s inside view that cuts through the formal differences and deals directly with the meaning of a text to be translated. The foreign words found in the text are transformed into concepts, and these concepts become

the basis for the translators in producing essentially the same meanings in another language (Nida, 2001).

1.7. Organization of the Study

The report of the study was developed in the following sections or chapters: Chapter Two will discuss a review of related literature covering the areas of translating and translation, with emphasis on the equivalence-based and the skopos theories; Chapter Three deals with a discussion of the design and procedure used in the study, with qualitative approach; Chapter Four will discuss a report of the data collected and analyzed, with findings as the main topic of discussion; and Chapter Five will present a summary, conclusions, implications, and recommendations for further research.

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY

3.1. Introduction

Chapter II has discussed literature related to this study, including notions of translating and translation. Specifically, it discusses theories of translation, both the equivalence and skopos theories; definitions of translation; translation methods; abilities of translating; translation strategies; difficulties encountered in translating; and possible solutions to the problems. This chapter will provide a detailed delineation of the methodology for this research, which drew on all the literature reviewed.

This case study, which is qualitative in nature, was conducted in a natural setting and had urged the researcher to carry out three tasks: building a complex picture of the informants; analyzing words; and reporting detailed views of informants – both the translators (the librarians, that is) and the reader informants (faculty members and students) (Appendix 5). The researcher attempted to make sense of translational phenomena or interpret them in terms of meanings the informants brought to them (Denzin and Lincoln (1994: 219). This research involved documents and a collection of a variety of empirical materials – case study, personal experience, interviews, and written texts, all of which described routine and problematic moments and meanings inferred in the informants’ achievements in translating and the reader informants in exercising their comprehension on the translations produced. Most informants in the present study are still far

and as such need to be made aware of the importance of the text’s purpose or the skopos. The researcher sought an inquiry process of understanding based on a distinct methodological tradition of inquiry: a case study.

3.2. Method of Research

A qualitative method was employed, taking in descriptive and inferential procedures. It was employed to investigate the processes involved in the preparation and the production of translations produced by the informants. This method was applied to obtain systematic, factual, and accurate data. It could also be used to uncover and understand what lies behind any phenomenon about which little is yet known (Strauss and Corbin, 1990; Ary, 1990). The two theories - equivalence and skopos, the criteria of translating, the abilities as possibly equipped to the translators, and the readership’s expectation are applied in this study to investigate the translations produced in the light of Nord’s Four Translation Errors (Nord, 1997). Meanwhile, some quantitative method in terms of inferential procedures was employed to examine how frequent an informant exercised certain skills and how frequent some translation methods were used occurred in a given time (Hatch and Lazaraton, 1991).

As indicated earlier, aspects pertaining to the study, such as the purpose, the instruments and informants, access to the site, the role of the researcher, and the research cycle will be discussed in this section. To gain the informants’ views on their attempts to translate, a one-on-one interview and responsive observation are conducted. Eight questions in the interview and twenty statements in the observation (See Appendix 1) are meant to net the most useful information to answer research questions. These two modes are offered to generate their insights:

another way of getting closer to their overall picture of abilities exercised, their decisions made, and their translations produced. As for the reader informants, an interview to identify their comprehension on the translation is also conducted. Seven reader informants are involved: two faculty members of the Psychology Department, four students of the Psychology Department, and one student of Library and Information Studies. Six of the reader informants are selected from the Psychology Department due to their concerns in the field of study while one of them is from the field of Library and Information Studies to generate some relevance.

3.2.1. The Instruments and Informants

A qualitative method was employed, taking in thick descriptive procedure. A case study on the librarians working at a central library of an Indonesian university was chosen. To collect the qualitative data, participative observation, interviews, and studied documents were used. Participating in the study were ten university subject librarians. These professionals holding an S1 (Sarjana stratum one) attended twenty-four translating sessions within a three-month period of May 16, to August 4, 2006. Seven reader informants, lecturers and students, were also interviewed to gain some picture of comprehension on the translations produced. Proceduralized phases were taken to collect data from both the informants: text items were offered to the librarian informants; the process of translating then took place – reading, understanding, reproducing; interview followed; units of data were collected; analyzing the data; drawing conclusions; the translations produced were then offered to the reader informants; reading to comprehend took place; interview followed; checking the degree of understanding on the reader informants proceeded; personal insights were collected; drawing conclusions to gain units of data

and then what seemed to be improper came afterwards. Findings from the study were then revealed.

Three phases of research had been undertaken: (1) the preliminary study; (2) the construction of a conceptual mode of approach; and (3) the implementation of the mode for identifying occurrence. This study described the tendency of occurrence in terms of meaning being insufficient and the factual skills as it was reflected by the informants’ profile, both general and personal abilities, and also the acceptance on the readers’ part. Verbal data were elicited in the form of descriptive narratives of especially field notes and other relevant written records including hand-written documents. This descriptive study was carried out without a hypothesis strictly formulated or tested. Analytically, the result of the present study was used as a back-up of the answers to the research questions. Descriptive analysis included finding out the insufficiency in terms of meaning in the Indonesian translated texts due to difficulties of achieving adequate equivalence in the English original. Also discussed was the theory of skopos with more convincing result in the TL, methods employed, adequacies achieved, translators’ profiles and abilities, and an avenue possibly given by the phenomenon for a betterment in terms of translation quality.

Two kinds of data collected in the present study were qualitative and quantitative. The primary data, however, was qualitative. To analyze the qualitative data, a non-statistical analysis was used: descriptive analysis, meaning-making sense of the data collected using a natural setting, and logical inferences. The strategy for a purposeful sampling was typical case:

highlighting what was normal or average (Creswell, 1998). To analyze the quantitative data, a statistical analysis was used: frequency and percentage (Hatch and Lazaraton, 1991).

To add to the researcher’s understanding, interviews with both informants, the librarians and the target readers, were carried out. An observation by making use of observation protocols employing an interview mode to secure general information with regard to their performance in translating and their comprehension on the translations produced was also made.

3.2.2. Access to the Site

Permission for conducting this inquiry has been granted by the Head of the Library and the Head of Psychology Department, and access to the community of university librarians has been given by a Senior Librarian acting, later, as one of the ten informants.

With permission from the Head, preliminary observations were directly conducted to make sure that necessary matters such as personal computers, printers, dictionaries, thesaurus, available time of the participants, journal articles, conducive environments, and a fixed schedule would work appropriately. During this period of rapport building and preliminary data collection, articles from English journals were selected. One of them, as attached in Appendix 2 is Steven E. Knotek’s (2003) Making Sense of Jargon During Consultation: Understanding Consultees’ Social Language to Effect Change in Student Study Teams, which was an excerpt from Journal of

Educational & Psychological Consultation issued in 2003 (See Appendix 2). The article is considered representative as it has the characteristics of an appropriate text for translating.

3.2.3. The Role of the Researcher

The present qualitative research design made use of case study emphasizing on thick, descriptive accounts of the community of university librarians as a bounded system (Cohen, 2000). The researcher was integrally involved in the case. To collect data with a case study perspective, seven activities as suggested by Creswell (1998) were carried out: (1) locating site/individuals; (2) gaining access and making rapport; (3) conducting purposeful sampling; (4) collecting data; (5) recording information; (6) resolving field issues; and (7) storing data. These activities were addressed for a general procedure and approach in the tradition of inquiry in the case study. Therefore, matters to be taken into account were: (a) what was studied was a bounded system of a program; (b) the access and rapport was to gain the confidence of the informants – the librarians and the target readers; (c) the site selected was a case; (d) the type of information collected was interviews, observation, and documents in the form of translations produced by the informants; (e) the information recorded comprised field notes, interviews, observational protocols, and documents in the form of hand-written translated texts; (f) the common data collection issues were interviewing, observing issues, and analyzing documents; and (g) the information was stored in field notes, and computer files. Selected variables were set to achieve some adequacy.

Meaning-making was endeavored using a natural setting involving the researcher as the key instrument infiltrating the community of informants with “emic-ethic” issue (Syamsuddin and Damaianti, 2006). Having a sufficient background and being experienced in translating, the researcher played the role both as an observer and an instrument with trustworthiness (Lincoln and Guba, 1985), especially, when it comes to very challenging matters of translation techniques

such as text legibility, being familiar with the subject, linguistic resources (dictionaries, thesauri, linguistics-based human contacts) to decipher unfamiliar words, missing parts of the text, the requested timeframe, and reasons for doing it (as a learning experience, enjoyment, helping a friend) (Sofer, 1996). Along the process of in-class translating sessions, the researcher exercised an introspective and reflective account of his own translating experiences.

Although generalizability is central to method (Eisner and Peshkin, 1990), the researcher did not use his personal experience as a source of generalization and did not make an effort to generalize this case study in a personal, idiosyncratic way. However, the study described here refers to what Donmoyer (1990) terms as “anticipatory schemata” – complementing the existing cognitive structure, that is, the context-specific nature of the findings should enrich the experiential knowledge in that its novelty should be accommodated.

3.2.4. Research Phases

The study consisted of three phases. Phase one involved collecting sufficient descriptive data of translating and translation from the field reported in the form of an analysis in order to gain some thorough descriptions and an appropriate development of selection and design. Following the analysis was an in-depth observation in which the condition of the informants’ abilities of translating the ST was revealed. Phase two involves gaining some empirical model of approaching the pattern of translating of which concerns include some key components such as concept of equivalence, concept of skopos theory, the SL and TL being relatable to functionally relevant features, and relevance to the communicative function of the text being translated

the nature and conditions of translation adequacies in general – what constitutes the production of translated texts through highlighting what is normal or average (Creswell, 1998). The way the informants decide as to which an adequacy is taken to be the basis on which SL is replaced by TL textual material (Catford, 1965) generates the characteristics of insufficient meaning.

3.3. Techniques of Collecting the Data

Three kinds of data collection were used: in-depth, open ended interviews; direct observation; and written documents of the produced translations. The data from the interviews consisted of written responses from both the informants about their experiences, opinions, feeling, and knowledge during the process of translating and the impact it brings to the target readers (Patton, 1980). In collecting relevant data for each research question, multiple data-collection techniques were utilized. The general outline of data data-collection for the three research questions is as follows.

3.3.1. Research Question 1

How closely did the librarians preserve the meaning and quality of the original text?

Data collection 1: An after-class session structured interview following the completion of the observational protocols on requisites (Sofer, 1996) to reveal the informants’ abilities and preparedness was conducted to find out:

1. Whether the informants’ knowledge of both the SL and the TL was thorough. This section of the observation dealt with the informants’ being fully familiar with the two

languages – language of the ST and language of the TT. Also, the informants’ vocabulary being equal to the speakers of both languages was explored.

2. Whether the informants’ familiarity in both cultures was thorough. This section of the observation dealt with the informants’ feelings, attitudes and beliefs regarding the living phenomenon of the two languages. Accordingly, the informants’ being fully familiar with the languages must also deal with their being familiar with the cultures of the languages. In brief, this section sought to reveal all linguistic elements that may go into making a culture.

3. Whether the informants kept up with the growth and change of the language, and were up-to-date in all its nuances and neologisms. This part of the observation was constructed to provide the informants’ being updated in the constant state of flux of the two languages, their awareness that a number of words change meaning from year to year (Nida, 1976). Any neutral words in the text items being translated might have changed compared to the same words twenty years ago – from neutral to being loaded with meaning.

4. Whether the informants were familiar with only their own language. This section sought to reveal some degree of distinction between the languages the informants translated from and into. Further information sought included the informants’ ability in writing in the TL, that is, being flawless in their native language but not necessarily reflected in the SL.

5. Whether the informants were able to translate in more than one area of knowledge. What was sought through this section dealt with gathering data on areas other than the corpus of Psychology that the informants must cover such like Communication, Sociology, and Medical Sciences. Their interest in increasing their vocabulary in a variety of related as well as unrelated fields was also sought.

6. Whether the informants had a facility for writing and the ability to articulate accurately the work they translated. This section of the observation sought to reveal the informants’ ability to transmit the author’s ideas in real time, and in sufficiently understandable language. Their awareness that they are writers or second authors in a sense was also sought.

7. Whether the informants’ ability to develop research skills and acquire reference sources worked to produce relatively high quality translation. This section sought to reveal the informants’ being always on the lookout for new reference sources and their being able to keep developing a data bank which can be used in their work.

The message of the ST being preserved in the TT, the method being used, and the problems being encountered by the translators are then identified. The abilities and the degree of preparedness on the informants’ part were interpreted by the number of negative in comparison to the number of positive responses. Analysis on the result included an evidence of the informants’ ability falling into one of the categories of the six Abilities One to Six (A1 – A6) as depicted in Table 2 on page 37.

Data collection 2: Direct observation of the informants’ translated texts was conducted. This observation focused on observable linguistic background which included the informants’ various abilities of 11 components (C1 – C11 of A1 – A6 in Table 2) in understanding a text – a potent cultural object, as a means of communicating someone else’s ideas in which it had to satisfy conditions such as cohesion, coherence, acceptability, informativity, situationality, and intertextuality (Beaugrande and Dressler in Titscher, 2000).

Data collection 3: Focus group was the object of treatment to give clues as the informants’ strategies come to application. Using the existing data collected through different sources (produced translation texts, stimulated-recall interviews on strategy use, evidence-based insufficient renderings, and interviews with reader informants) analyses were made of the informants’ written products by juxtaposing them with the ST and the key instrument’s work. To ensure accurate representation of the informants’ translating processes, less formal but serving as confirmation interviews on the produced translations with all informants were also conducted.

3.3.2. Research Question 2

Which translation methods were used to achieve relative equivalences?

Data collection: Using the data collected from the interviews as a validated source, analysis was made of the informants’ handwritten translation work by juxtaposing them with the back-translated work of the same ST produced by the researcher serving as an instrument of the study with the library users as the reader informants. Grounds for employing any one of the eight

decisions. Confirmation through additional interviews was made from the phenomenon to ensure accurate representation of the informants’ translating processes (See Appendix 1).

3.3.3. Research Question 3

What problems did the librarians encounter in translating the text?

Data collection: Direct examination of the informants’ translated texts was conducted. It aimed at finding out both sufficiency and insufficiency of meaning in the Indonesian translated texts due to the difficulties of achieving equivalences in the English original: what was normal or average (Creswell, 1998) in terms of the insufficiency was highlighted by juxtaposing the informants’ produced translation work. Insufficiency of meanings, especially, is the focus since it affects target reader’s acceptableness. Responses the informants have to activate during the observation in a one-on-one mode of approach dealt with the five of the twenty difficulties of the primary source namely the author, and the secondary source – the informants themselves. The responses (See also Appendix 1) to the statements (Nida in Sakri, 1984) below were collected to infer certain meanings and discern the existence of potentials possibly lying within the meanings:

1. You viewed yourself from the perspective of your monolingual comprehension of the translated text.

2. Relying heavily on the principles and rules for translating was what you did when translating.

3. It was discouraging enough for you to provide a meaningful equivalent text. 4. You did not merely translate but also provide a kind of running commentary.

5. To substitute cultural adjustments, you ameliorated them by way of supplementary notes. 6. You felt comfortable to make some alteration to accommodate readership’s

understanding.

7. Analyzing and describing the cognitive equivalences of content was a lot easier for you than analyzing and describing the formal equivalences of language.

8. Finding appropriate formal equivalences in the TL (Indonesian) has always been problematic.

9. You gained success in reproducing a relatively satisfactory content equivalent of certain original word or phrase.

10.Lack of functional equivalence within the respective communication structure of SL and TL existed.

11.You usually produced a close literal translation and gave explanations of the meaning in the footnotes.

12.To adapt to the formal features of a source language text, you translated in interlinear way (word-for-word translation).

13.Rhetorical features of language employed by the author bothered your attempt to be straightforward.

14.The values associated with a particular dialect were highly specific leading to almost no successful matching.

15.Although you were not willing to be called a traitor (Simatupang, 2000) by violating the intent of the author and of the spirit of the text, you were ready to become one.

17.You have a tendency to alter the meaning of the text to fit your own presuppositions. 18.The expectancies of receptors as to the validity of translation concerned every part of

your attempt to produce relatively sound work of translation, including the phases of correction and revision (Suryawinata, 1989).

19.You have been faithful to both the content and the form of the original.

20.Making every effort possible to anticipate the reactions of your prospective audience properly gave you the feeling of being responsible.

Statements numbered 3, 7, 8, 9, and 10 were especially emphasized in examining the produced translations. They were emphasized because they deal with the features of equivalence.

Direct observation on the reader informants’ responses to the translations produced by the informants was conducted. It aimed at finding out both acceptableness and the impact on the target readers. Insufficiency of meanings is the focus since it affects target reader’s acceptableness. The reader informants’ answers to the questions (Reiss and Vermeer, 1978; 1984/1991) in the light of the interview (See also Appendix 5) were collected to infer certain meanings and discern the existence of potentials possibly lying within the meanings. As for the readability and comprehensiveness on the reader informants’ part, an interview with 7 reader informants was conducted. Well-equipped translators with A1-A6 are those whose skills fulfill the criteria set to make a good translator. The seven reader informants were selected among the faculty members and the students. They were involved in a thorough investigative interview to see the whole set of the produced translations. The criteria set would reveal whether the

translators’ skills are reflected through their translations. The questions below were asked to the seven informants:

1. Are the translations produced by the librarians accurate, clear and natural? 2. Have the translations been transmitted properly in a way?

3. Compared to the back-translated version, do you see any improprieties?

4. Do you think the translator (the librarian) faithful enough to the English source text? 5. Does the librarian really communicate with his/her Indonesian target text?

6. Is the intended purpose of the Indonesian target text fulfilled?

7. Do you see any clues that the librarian experienced difficulties in translating? 8. All in all, the translations are useful enough for the target readers. Do you agree?

9. Culturally and linguistically, readers can comprehend and eventually benefit from the translations. Do you accept this?

10.Is the translation in general an offer of information made by the librarian to you? 11.Are attempts of generating adequacy to the purpose of the target texts acceptable?

12.Would you, in a few words give some comments to the translations produced by the librarians?

By utilizing the data collection strategy of drawing conclusion from the answers to the above questions, some rough pictures and profiles of the informants were attained. Both the pictures and the profiles guided the researcher in gaining confidence to develop his notions towards effectiveness upon completion of the study. Being effective in ameliorating the

an increased quality to the translations produced. Based on the data collected, accounts describing the whole picture of the study is attempted, and statements are offered upon synthesizing it.

3.4. Data Analysis

The mode of analysis in the present study was concerned with written textual analysis. This interpretive case study worked as a way of understanding textual data with hermeneutics as its philosophical base (Myers, 1997, modified 2006). The primary data gathered directly from the informants and the secondary data were analyzed inductively using the data from which to search for meaningful recurring patterns of informants’ behaviors in translating, reader informants’ acceptance, and relationships among units of data. Analytic induction (Huberman and Miles, 1994) was used to construct a chain of evidence, plot the logical relationships, test them against the yield from the next wave of data collection and, modify and refine the data into a new explanatory map. This procedure used an enumerative analysis, in which a number and variety of instances all going in the same direction was collected. More specifically, in making sense of the relationships among the translation methods employed, the translations, and the translators’ abilities, a logical basis was established so as to claim that the abilities as equipped to the translators in terms of employing certain translation methods were revealed. To conclude, insufficiency in terms of meanings in the TL was analyzed, gearing to a possibility of making room for some betterment through a number of suggestions.

Using theoretical ideas as a frame and common sense expectation as a guide, with the units of patterned data, the researcher arrived at a position to find links between ideas and

behaviors as reflected in the data. The refined result of this data analysis process constitutes the findings of the study, which took the forms of an arrangement of facts formulated in a set of explanations or interpretations.

To confirm the findings, triangulation was employed. Since doubt might be existent, the data collected was tested to have meanings at least empirical. The triangulation sources of different biases and strengths which included both the informants; method which included observation, interview and document; researcher which meant the author himself as key informant; theory which included experts’ previous study; and data type which included qualitative text in the form of handwritten translated texts (See Appendix 1) were picked to complement each other. Checking the researcher’s impressions and interpretations with both informants (i.e., member check) from time to time during the given period to confirm that what he saw was the meanings they held as the insiders was also done. The purpose was, to one degree or another, to gain some close up information useful for readership.

The researcher anticipates five issues to assess the trustworthiness of the finally emerging findings: confirmability, dependability, credibility, transferability, and application (Huberman and Miles, 1994: 278-280 ). A guide in the form of questions was applied to the present work: (1) Does the researcher feel that he has a complete picture, including “backstage” information?; (2) Are study data retained and available for reanalysis by others?; (3) Are the research questions clear?; (4) Are the features of the study design congruent with the research questions?; (5) Does the account “ring true,” make sense, seem convincing or plausible, and

the report examine possible threats to generalizability?; (8) Are the processes and outcomes described in conclusions generic enough to be applicable in other settings?; (9) What is the level of usable knowledge offered? (this level may range from consciousness-raising and the development of insight or self-understanding to broader considerations: a theory to guide action, policy advice, or, it may be local and specific: corrective recommendations, specific action images); and (10) Will users of the findings learn, or develop new capacities? These questions were pointers in that they might serve as a guide to possibly reach the compellingness of the study. To arrive at readers’ acceptance, the researcher feels quite compelled to present his findings to give a room for discussion among those interested.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

5.1. Summary

The general purpose of this study was the investigation of the librarians’ ability in coping with difficulties found in translating an article of a scholarly journal article. The text selected for the study in the field of Psychology was broken down into twenty-three text items for research treatment. Various difficulties comprising linguistic and cultural barriers experienced by the translators resulted in the insufficiency of meaning. Quantitatively, as much as 26.8%. It means that the ability of the translators to communicate the original ST as exercised by the author proved to be low. Approximately some 73.2% of the whole text was communicated with some adequacy. This readily perceived insufficiency was contributed by three dimensions: the components of ability as acquired by the translators, the methods used, and the equivalences to be achieved for the readership: making use of the purpose in the TT. There is a high likelihood that the components unexercised by most of the translators, the repeatedness in terms of their using the translation methods, and the equivalence they decided to achieve play a greater role in showing some typicality – the meanings being insufficient because of the same loss, similarity of using the methods, and similar representation of decision to achieve the equivalence. This study, therefore, was meant to function also as an initial step toward a betterment in the field of

translation both in terms of quality and quantity – relatively sound translation meaningful to certain academic community (the target readers, especially).

In the literature, it has been indicated that the willingness of subject librarians working at an academic library to challenge the translating task is low despite its obligatory kind of assignment imposed by the Perpusnas RI – Indonesian National Library. Part of the reason is that they must experience being influenced by the properties of SL text in their TL leading to generating some insufficiency of information. Around 20% of insufficiency takes place or, it is unlikely that comprehension rises above 80% percent level. The ability of translating in general has been indicated in numerous studies. Criticisms on different ways of approaching the very attempt of transferring someone else’s ideas into the translators’ thought followed by reproducing the intent as exercised by the original writer are existent.

Celebrated translators with years of experience in producing celebrated translations are not an exception in losing information when communicating their own way – struggling with challenges and problematic issues. Translation is a challenge and as such demands those undertaking translation to: (1) prevent from lacking of elegance of a translation; (2) avoid lacking of richness of expression; (3) connect style and content; (4) precipitate into the nightmare of unknowable; (5) come up against obsessive outbursts by avalanches of confused words; (6) preserve the flow of the language; (7) temper fidelity to the text with fluidity of language; (8) maintain the sense of language (while targeting for the readership); (9) give reasons for undertaking the translation; (10) unresolve ambiguities; (11) avoid making the TT sound too different from the original; (12) prevent from being tempted to interpret instead of sticking to

translation; (13) communicate with ACN; (14) avoid translating the same word differently at different times; and (15) prevent from imposing their own style.

The data for this study were collected from ten selected university subject librarians working at an academic library. Total participation of 100 percent during the process of translating 23 text items or altogether 134 sentences of a journal article resulted in hand-written translations (See Appendix 1). Seven reader informants were interviewed to identify their comprehension on the translations produced by the librarians. These data were analyzed to seek answers to the research questions. The informants’ responses to the observation and their answers through one-on-one interview through the two modes revealed the translators’ profile and identified the sources of inability to translate especially hard written expressions.

The translators’ inability prevented them from producing a text with a high quality from which their readers should benefit. Their being unable to survive from flawed translations contributed to difficulty of constructing a new reader thus making it an insufficiency of information on the readership’s part.

5.2. Conclusions

The translations as the text reproduced by the librarians represented the components of abilities – Components 1 to 11 of Abilities 1 to 3 most of the translators have in attempting to transfer hard written expressions by employing primarily semantic and secondarily communicative methods to achieve pragmatic equivalences. Based on the results of the study,

1. The inability to reproduce a text with its incompleteness acceptable to the readership was, overall, due to: (a) the translators’ less thorough knowledge of both the SL and the TL; (b) being not familiar in both cultures of the languages; (c) being intimately familiar with the translators’ L1 only; (d) the translators’ less than adequate facility for writing and the ability to articulate accurately the work to be translated; and (e) being not able to develop research skill and acquire reference sources to produce high quality translation. Therefore, the translations are a bit far from being close to the SL: the choice of words in reproducing the ST text proves to be less than a pleasure to read.

2. The translators’ intention to compromise on meaning appropriately and with flexibility to make both content and language accessible and comprehensible to the readership faces adversities which include: (a) analyzing and describing the formal equivalences of language; (b) finding appropriate formal equivalences in the TL; (c) reproducing a relatively satisfactory content equivalent of the original ST; (d) lacking of functional equivalence within the respective communication structure of SL and TL. Accordingly, repeatedness in terms of using the same two methods was detected.

3. The high frequency of unexercising the same components of abilities by most of the librarians denotes quite similar texts reproduced and hence typicality of the meanings being insufficient is emerged. On average, as reflected by the translators in transferring the ideas of the original writer, they do not understand the way natives think as they produce a text with accuracy of their capacity. The difficulties encountered by the librarians then includes the followings: preventing themselves from providing relevant or

significant information; properly adapting source-culture conventions to target-culture standards; focusing on language structures or preventing deviations from standard TL usages; and creating adequacy to the purpose of the ST in the TT.

5.3. Limitations of the Study

It was apparent that this study had time, event, and process limitations. Ivanic and Weldon (1999) contend that there is some potential loss of objectivity in every stage of research in terms of both data collection and analyses. Therefore, the in-depth picture of the case might not be presented sufficiently in that the value of this case study might be limited. Although this study has generated some interesting findings, it might still be far from being conclusive and comprehensive in nature. There are several limitations that may affect credibility and transferability of this study. Other limitations of the study include lack of data about the intercoder reliability of coding procedures and researcher bias. As a consequence, the findings might not entirely reflect the characteristics of the librarians’ translating ability as evidenced by this group of professionals upon the completion of the study.

5.4. Implications

A number of inabilities as shown by frequent wrongly-translated text from the original ST by the translators serve as a source of exploration. It is implied that a group of professionals – the university librarians, would undertake another task of translating with some improved accuracy, better clarity and reasonably sound naturalness: reeducation. The overall performance of this group could be discouraging to some extent but, to other translators of different groups of

As implied by most informants in the study, difficulties of various stages would remain challenging and would therefore give rooms for further exploration. With regard to the incompleteness of information as provided by translators on average, functional equivalence within the respective communication structure of SL and TL would probably more convincing than formal equivalence or even cognitive equivalence.

Regardless of any possible betterment in reproducing an ST by way of functional equivalence, other aspects concerning the perspective of librarians’ monolingual comprehension of the translated text would be plausible to be taken into consideration. The significant correlations among the librarians’ abilities, the methods used in a repetitive mode, and the pragmatic equivalence achieved could imply that there should be one missing factor contributing significantly to the insufficiency of meaning experienced by these professionals. It is also implied that the repeatedness of using the same methods occurring during the process of translation would suggest some typical insufficiency of meaning in the TT.

In their attempts to provide meaningful equivalent text, the librarians would prevent themselves from relying heavily on the principles and rules for translating what they thought they knew. The impact, though, would be the readership’s to opt: accepting or rejecting the produced translations.

5.5. Recommendations for Further Research

Further research is needed in the area of translating and translation with regard to their theoretical and applied principles that might be relevant to translation teaching policy maker

regarding quality translation. Avenues to translation is a possibility as it has been noted that while translation itself is vital, needs for translation are being met by a small though capable activity. All of us might find that there are attractive opportunities for improvement in translation and, work aimed at such improvement is due urged. Hence, further study could be conducted in the following areas:

1. Techniques of translating the untranslatables being methods as the emphasis towards translating especially hard written expressions. This area of further study could be a challenge for those who insist that translation is impossible. Hoed (1992:xiii) says that although there are many difficulties in translating, there is still a possibility to translate. Part of the reason is that there are general language components and system. Accordingly, reeducating professionals through training and study would be a possibility.

2. Specification of potential competencies that other groups of professionals (e.g. lawyers, medical doctors, economists, engineers) might have in translation. Different fields of study as an object of translation suggest various kinds of translations in terms of their readability to readership in the light of the receptor’s characteristics.

3. Relativity of soundness among different equivalences (cognitive, formal, functional). Completeness in terms of absolute equivalent never exists. Therefore, strengths and weaknesses of each of the approach give room for further investigation.

4. Untranslatability in Indonesian cultural setting. This area of study deals with an interplay between two languages involving many aspects. As coined by Musyahda (2005:72), simply knowing the words and grammar of a language does not ensure successful communication: its interpretation depends among others on cultural assumption.

5. Developing models of translation adopting contemporary linguistic theories. Among interesting topics to investigate include a dynamic model of translation competence acquisition, with empirical-experimental studies based on representative samples.

6. Translating scholarly articles across disciplines from scientific journals: an improved analysis. This area of further study would best be emphasizing on in-depth analysis of seminal theories of translation.

7. Research similar to this one but involving a wider scope of translating and translation with larger institutional and personal participation: similar study of different groups of professionals to translate Law Science since it is considered as the most difficult translation in the world except The Holy Qur’an and The Bible. In the case of religious texts, form and contents often constitute an inseparable bond (Nida, 1976:68), which is a challenge to prospective translators.

As for the reeducating professionals towards some betterment, advantages and disadvantages are worth taking into consideration. One thing for sure is that translational practice has to change in the light of theories (Viaggio in Dollerup, 1994). To be more

specific, professional development in translation training, for example should not admonish translators to be good (Ibid: 97). The initial knowledge as possibly suggested in this work could be a field of objects and acceptable statements as well – ideas to start with.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abdulhamied, F. 1996. Teknik Memahami Bahan Bacaan. Paper presented at In-House Training on Writing A Book Review for Librarian. Bandung, December 4th, 1996.

Alwasilah, A.C. 1991. Cultural Transfer in Communication: a qualitative study of Indonesian students in U.S. academic settings. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Indiana University at Bloomington.

Alwasilah, A.C. 2008. Filsafat Bahasa dan Pendidikan. Bandung: SPs. UPI dan PT Remaja Rosdakarya.

Ary, D. J. and Razavich, A. 1990. Introduction in Resesearch in Education. 4th edition. Chicago: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc.

Astika, G. 2007. Readings in Language Teaching and Research: task design for a translation class. Salatiga: Widya Sari Press.

Aveling, H. 2004. A Short History of Western Translation Theory. TEXT. Vol.8 no.1. Available online: http://www.griffith.edu.au/school/art/text

Baker, M. 1992. In Other Words: a course book on translation. London: Routledge.

Balasko, M. 2006. In Search of Translationese: unusual multiword units in a

Hungarian comparable corpus. A paper presented at The Second Conference of The International Association for Translation and Intercultural Studies:

intervention in translation, interpreting and intercultural encounters. University of Western Cape, South Africa, 12th -14th July 2006.

Baorong, W. 2009. Translating Publicity Texts in the Light of Skopos Theory: problems and suggestions. Translation Journal. Vol. 13, No.1, January 2009.

Barnwell, K. 1977. Bible Translation: an introductory course in translation principles. Dallas: S.I.L.

Bassnett, S. 1991. Translation Studies. London: Routledge.

Bauer, H. 2003. Not Translation but a Mutilation: the limits of translation and the discipline of sexology. Available online: http://proquest.umi.com

Bell, R.T. 1991. Translation and Translating. London: Longman.

Bell, RT.. 1999. Translation and Translating: theory and Practice. New York: Longman.

Catford, J.C. 1965. A Linguistic Theory of Translation: an essay in applied language. London: Oxford University Press.

Catford, Hartman and Stork. 1991. Panel Discussion: The motor theory alternative accounts, In: Modularity and the motor theory speech perception ed. By Mattingly, Ignatius M. Available online at http://www.percepp.com.

Chesterman, A. 1994. Translation and Text Transfer: An Essay on the Principles of Intercultural Communication. Available online at http://www.benjamins.com.

Choliludin. 2006. The Technique of Making Idiomatic Translation. 2nd edition. Jakarta: Kesaint Blanc.

Cohen. L. et.al. 2000. Research Methods in Education. 5th. edition. New York: Routledge Farmer.

Connor, U. 1996. Contrastive Rhetoric: cross-cultural aspects of second language writing. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Coulthart, Malcolm and Caldas-Coulhart, C.R. eds. 1996. Texts and Practices: readings in critical discourse analysis. London and New York: Routledge.

Creswell, J.W. 1998. Qualitative Inquiry and research Design: choosing among five traditions. London: SAGE Publications.

Dollerup, C and Lindegaard, A. eds. 1994. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 2: insights, aims, visions. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Donmoyer, R. 1990. Generalizability and The Single-Case Study. In E.W. Eisner, and A. Peshkin (eds.), Qualitative Inquiry in Education: a continuing debate. New York: Teachers College Press.

Duff, A. 1989. Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Eadie, J. 1999. A Translation Technique. English Teaching Forum. Vol. 37 number 1.

Eisner, Elliot W and Peshkin, Alan. 1990. Qualitative Inquiry in Education: the continuing debate. New York and London: Teachers College Press.

Emilia, E. 2008. Menulis Tesis dan Disertasi. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Frank, D. 1999. Cultural Dimensions of Translation into Creole Languages. Available online: http://linguafranka.net/saintluciacreole/workpapers/12.htm

Vol. 34 number 1.

Gentzier, E. 1993. Contemporary Translation Theories. London: Routledge.

Halliday, M.A.K. 1994. An introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd edition. London: Edward Arnold.

Halverson, SL. 1997. The Concept of Equivalence in Translation Studies: Much Ado About Something. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Hatch, E.M. and Lazaraton, A. 1991. The Research Manual: design and statistics for applied linguistics. New York: Newbury House Publishers.

Hatim, B. 2001. Teaching and Researching Translation. Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited.

Hatim and Mason. 1990. Discourse and the Translator. New York: Longman.

Hatim and Mason. 1994. 5th impression. Discourse and the Translator. London and New York: Longman.

Hatim and Munday. 2004. Translation: An advanced resource book. London and New York: Routledge.

Haywood, L.M. 2005. The Translation Emergency Tool Kit. Available online: http://www.cam.ac.uk/call/translation/toolkit/7

Hoed, B.H. 1977. Beberapa Informasi Teoretis Dasar Mengenai Terjemahan. Paper presented at The Fifth Training for Translators. Jakarta: Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa.

Hoed, B.H. 1992. Kala dalam Novel: fungsi dan penerjemahannya. Yogyakarta: Gajah Mada University Press.

House, J. 1997. Translation Quality Assessment: a model revisited. Dischingerweg Tubingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.

Huberman, A.M. and Miles, M.B. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis. 2nd ed. London: SAGE Publications.

Ivanic, R and Weldon, S. 1999. Researching the Writer-Reader Relationship. In Candlin, C., and Hyland, K. eds. Writing: texts, processes and practices. London:

Longman.

James, K. 2005. Cultural Implications for Translation. Available online: http://www.proz.com/doc/256.

Johan, A.G. 2004. Reading & Translation:Pelajaran Membaca dan Menerjemahkan Bahasa Inggris. 3rd edition. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Johns, A.M. 1997. Text, Role and Context: developing academic literacies. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kaur, K. 2006. A competent translator and Effective Knowledge Transfer. Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya Press.

Kilham, C. 1996. Translation Time: an introductory course in translation. Darwin: Summer Institute of Linguistics.

Knotek, S.E. 2003. Making Sense of Jargon During Consultation: understanding consultee’s social language to effect change in Student Study Teams (SSTs). Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation. Vol. 14 number 2.

Koller. 1990. A linguistic approach to translation: its range and limitations. Oslo.

Koltay, T. 2002. Teaching Proposal Writing to Translators. Translation Journal. Vol. 6 number 2. Available online: http://accurapid.com/journal/20 edu.htm

Larson, M.L. 1984. Meaning-based Translation: a guide to cross-language equivalence. Lanham: University Press of America.

Lee, M. 2001. The Skewed Voices and Lost Meaning: the reflections of multilingual issues in the cross-cultural context. Available online:

http://www.edst.educ.ubc.ca/aerc/2001/lee.htm

Leonardi, V. 2000. Equivalence in Translation: between myth and reality. Available online: http://accurapid.com/journal/14equip.htm

Levy. J. 2000. Translation as a decision process. Helsinki: Oy Finn Lectura.

Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Listyo, Indra. 2007. Relevance in Translation. Paper presented at The 5th Asian Translators Forum - FIT: Translation and Cultural Dialogue. Bogor, April 11-12, 2007.

Matikainen, T and Duffy.C.B. 2000. Developing Cultural Understanding. English Teaching Forum. Vol. 38 number 3.

Mendel, D.1998. Primo Levi and Translation. Available online:

http://www.leeds.ac.uk/bsis/98/98.pttm.htm

Koller. 1990. A linguistic approach to translation: its range and limitations. Oslo.

Koltay, T. 2002. Teaching Proposal Writing to Translators. Translation Journal. Vol. 6 number 2. Available online: http://accurapid.com/journal/20 edu.htm

Larson, M.L. 1984. Meaning-based Translation: a guide to cross-language equivalence. Lanham: University Press of America.

Lee, M. 2001. The Skewed Voices and Lost Meaning: the reflections of multilingual issues in the cross-cultural context. Available online: http://www.edst.educ.ubc.ca/aerc/2001/lee.htm

Leonardi, V. 2000. Equivalence in Translation: between myth and reality. Available online: http://accurapid.com/journal/14equip.htm

Levy. J. 2000. Translation as a decision process. Helsinki: Oy Finn Lectura.

Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Listyo, Indra. 2007. Relevance in Translation. Paper presented at The 5th Asian Translators Forum - FIT: Translation and Cultural Dialogue. Bogor, April 11-12, 2007.

Matikainen, T and Duffy.C.B. 2000. Developing Cultural Understanding. English Teaching Forum. Vol. 38 number 3.

Mendel, D.1998. Primo Levi and Translation. Available online: http://www.leeds.ac.uk/bsis/98/98.pttm.htm

Munday, J. 2001. Introducing Translation Studies: theories and applications. London and New York: Routhledge.

Musyahda, L. 2005. Strategic Competence: bridging the cross-cultural communication. TEFLIN. Journal. vol. 16 number 1, February 2005.

Myers, M.D. 1997. Modified 2006. Qualitative Research in Information Systems. Available online: http//:www.qual.auckland.ac.nz/

Nababan, MR. 2003. Teori Menerjemah Bahasa Inggris. 2nd edition. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Nababan, MR. 2007. Translation Process and Strategies: Two Case Studies. Available online: usd.ac.id/06/pub/_dosen/phenomena/feb 07/nababan.pdf.

Nation, I.S.P. 2002. Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Newmark, P. 1982. Approaches to Translation. London: Pergamon Press, Ltd.

Newmark, P. 1988. A Textbook of Translation. London: Prentice Hall Int., Ltd.

Nida, E.A. 1964. Toward a Science of Translating with a Special Reference to Principles and Procedures in Bible Translating. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

Nida, E.A. 1976. A Framework for the Analysis and Evaluation of Theories of

Translation. In Richard W. Brislin, ed. Translation, Applications and Research. New York: Gardner Press, Inc.

Nida, E.A. 2001. Contexts in Translating. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Johns Publishing company.

Brill.

Nord, C. 1991a. Scopos, loyalty and translational conventions. Target, 3(1): 91-109.

Nord, C. 1991b. Text Analysis in Translation. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Nord, C. 1997. Translating as a Purposeful Activity: functionalist approaches explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.

Nunan, D. 1989. Designing Tasks for Communicative Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Patton, M. 1980. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Method. London: SAGE.

Perpusnas RI. 2004. Perpustakaan Nasional Indonesia (Indonesia National Library). Jabatan Fungsional Pustakawan dan Angka Kreditnya. Jakarta: Perpusnas RI.

Preissle, J. 1994. Qualitative Design: an introduction. Available online: URL:http://.qsr.comau/Resource

Reiss, K and Vermeer, H. 1984. Groundwork for a general theory of translation. Tubingen: Max Niemeyer.

Reiss and Vermeer. 1991. A foundation of translation theory. Tubingen: Max Niemeyer.

Robinson, G.L.N. 1988. Crosscultural Understanding. New York: Prentice Hall.

Robinson, D. 2001. Who Translates?: translator subjectivities beyond reason. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Rose, M. 1985. Back-translating to Recover from. Babel International Journal of Translation. Vol. 31, number 1. pp. 6-11.

Rusmono, D. 2004. How University Librarians Communicate in English: an

Indonesian version of challenge and reality. Paper presented at The 9th English in Southeast Asian Conference. Yogyakarta, Sanata Dharma University. December 13 – 15, 2004.

Sakri, A. 1984. Ihwal Menerjemahkan. Bandung: Penerbit ITB.

Sakri, A. 1999. Ihwal Menerjemahkan. Bandung: ITB Press.

Samuelson-Brown., G. 1993. A Practical Guide for Translators. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Santos, D. 2006. On Grammatical Translationese. Department of British and

American Studies. University of Oslo. Available online: www.linguateca.pt.Diana

Scepanski, J.M. 2007. Forecasting, Forestalling, Fashioning: the future of academic libraries and librarians. Paper presented by Dean of Library, California State University, Long Beach USA, at a seminar on The Future of Academic Library in Higher Education and the Role of Information Technology. Universitas Pajajaran, Bandung, 2nd May 2007.

Schaffner, C. ed. 2000. Developing Translation Competence. Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing Company.

Schiffrin, D. 1994. Approaches to Discourse. Cambridge: Blackwell.

Verlag.

Simatupang, M.D.S. 2000. Pengantar Teori Terjemahan. Ditjen. Dikti. Depdiknas.

Snell-Hornby, M. 1988. Translation Studies: an integrated approach. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Sofer, M. 1996. The Translator’s Handbook. Rockville: Schreiber Publishing.

Stork et.al. 1991. The classification of Caucasian languages, In: Sidney M. Available online at lamb_e. Douglas Mitchell (eds) 232-268.

Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: grounded theory, procedures, and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

Suh, J.C. 2006. Predominant Attitudes in the Translation of African Literature. A paper presented at The Second Conference of The International Association for Translation and Intercultural Studies: intervention in translation, interpreting and intercultural encounters. University of Western Cape, South Africa, 12th -14th July 2006.

Suryawinata, Z.. 1989. Terjemahan: pengantar teori dan praktek. Jakarta: Ditjen Dikti Depdikbud, P2LPTK.

Syamsuddin dan Damaianti. 2006. Metode Penelitian Pendidikan Bahasa. Bandung: UPI dan PT. Remaja Rosdakarya Offset.

Syihabuddin. 2005. Penerjemahan Arab Indonesia (Teori dan Praktek). Bandung: Humaniora.

Thomas, R.L. 1990. Dynamic Equivalence: a method of translation or a systrem of hermeneutics? Available online: www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj 1 g.pdf.

Titscher, S. et. al. 2000. Methods of Text and Discourse Analysis. London: SAGE Publications.

Vermeer. 1978. Ein rahmen fur eine allegmeine translation theorie. Heidelberg: Julius Gross.

Vermeer, H.J. 1989. “Skopos and Commission in Translational Acytivity,” in Venuti, L. The Translation Studies Reader. London: Routledge.

Vermeer, H.J. 2000. Scopos and commission in translational action. A. Chesterman (trans.). In L. Venuti (ed.). The translation Studies Reader. London: Routledge.

Watson, C.W. 2004. Writing a Dissertation as Part of a Degree Program. Paper

presented to graduate students of English Education Program at a Seminar. School of Graduate Studies – Indonesia University of Education.

Winarni, Indah. et.al. 2005. English for Non English Department at Brawijaya

University: how essential? TEFLIN. Teaching English as A Foreign Language in Indonesia. vol. 16 Number 1, February 2005.

Witte, H. 1984. Teaching translation and interpreting 2: insights, aims, visions.

A paper from the Second Language International Conference, Elsinore, Denmark 4-6 June 1993.

Witte, H. 1992. Cultural constellations and translations. Leuven: CETRA

Witte, H. 1994. ”Translation as a means for a beter understanding between cultures?” In

Teaching translation and interpreting 2: insights, aims, visions. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Johns Benjamins Publishing Company.