EQUIVALENCE OF TRANSLATION: A CASE STUDY ON STUDENTS’
TRANSLATED TEXT
AGUS WAHYUDI
[email protected]
ABSTRACT
This study primarily focus investigates the equivalence level in students’
translated text of Bahasa Indonesia into English through formal and dynamic
equivalence. This study is conducted by using qualitative method and using
descriptive design.
The result of the study is the students translated text can be received by the reader
and fill full the criteria of both equivalence they are formal and dynamic
equivalence. The formal equivalence followed, Grammatical Units, reproduce
consistency in word usage aimed at concordance of terminology, and reproduce
meanings in terms of the source context. Meanwhile, dynamic equivalence followed,
equivalent referring to the source language message, natural which points toward the
target language, and closest which ties orientation on the basic of highest degree of
approximation.
ABSTRAK
Penelitian ini pada dasarnya berfokus untuk mengetahui tingkat kesamaan dalam
penerjemahan teks mahasiswa dari Bahasa Indonesia ke dalam Bahasa English
melalui kesamaan formal dan kesamaan dynamic. Penelitian ini menggunakan
metode qualitative dan menggunakan desain deskriptif.
Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah penerjemahan teks mahasiswa dapat diterima oleh
pembaca dan memenuhi syarat dari kedua kesamaan yaitu kesetaraan formal dan
kesetaraan dynamic. Sebuah kesetaraan formal meliputi, kesatuan tata bahasa,
memproses penggunaan kata secara kata per kata dalam indeks terminology, dan
memasukkan arti dalam bentuk sumber teks. Sementara itu, kesamaan dynamic
meliputi, kesamaan yang berhubungan dengan pesan sumber bahasa, kealamian
berdasarkan target bahasa, dan arti yang mendekati menghubungkan orentasi dasar
tingkat tertinggi dalam taksiran penerjemahan.
KEYWORDS: Translation, Equivalence Level, formal and dynamic equivalence
INTRODUCTION
Language is an important aspect in our lives.Language is a cultural product used
for communication in social life. As human being is social creature, language plays a
very important role in human life.In addition language has a unique system because
when we communicate uses language it has a different meaning exactly in other
language like Bahasa Indonesia to English or conversely English to Bahasa
Indonesia.The relevance between languages with translation can be seen in function
and advantages.As we know, English is international language in the world, so the
position of this language has high degree. Many people study English in each
country. They want to speak English fluently. Each person has different purpose to
study about English. Most of people also study about translation because it relates
with English. English has multiply meaning in Bahasa Indonesia. Up to now,
translation is needed for every student moreover student of English department.
1
But,the problems happen in the location like discrepancy between expectation and
reality. Result of student’s translation is still far from the expectation. The students
usually translate word by word. Translation is one way to transfer message from
source language to target language use grammatical structure and lexicon that
appropriate in target language and context culture (Larson 1983:17).The problem will
be discussed in this study is about equivalence of translation based on Nida’s Theory.
He argues that there are two different types of equivalence, namely formal
equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Formal equivalence is related structural or a
glass translation is source oriented which is designed to produce as much as possible
of the form and context of the original message. Dynamic Equivalence is related
closest natural equivalent to the source language message (Nida 1964: 159). Based on
Nida in his book to translate language should be focused on response of the receiver
message. So, the translation will be said well if the receivers understand the message.
The research problem of this studiesonly one. How is the equivalence of the
students’ translated text? Relate with the research problem the objective of this study
is to describe the equivalence level of the students’ translated text.This study is
intended to examine the equivalence of translation based on Nida’s theory, the
analysis focus only the data of students’ translated text of Bahasa Indonesia into
English. The analysis also discussed the equivalence in terms of formal and dynamic
equivalence.
Theoretical Study
The writer adds ideas to explain the theory divided into some sub such as,
Language definition, translation, equivalence level, formal equivalence and dynamic
equivalence, previous studies and the last is theoretical framework.
From an infants’ first cries at bird, human begin communicating with one
another. As infant grow, they develop more refined form of communication language.
Language use sound, symbol, or signs to form words. These words are combined
according to rules. This systematic approach allows for infinite number of ideas to
be expressed in a manner understandable to anyone who speaks that language. This
rich form of communication is unparalleled in any other species on earth. Language is
a fundamental part of how human interact with each other and the environment
around them. We use language to learn and understand the word. Without language, it
might have been impossible for humans to develop an advanced civilization
(sleeper,2007:1).
Communication occurs the messages, so they are conveyed by
intonation or inflection and are given by style (Chaika,1982:91).A language which
defines as town community and every individual act is always helping to create or
generate global language (Alexander, 1977:19). The translation models focused
largely on the sentence level and the analysis of deep sentence structure (Nida's
1964:80).Dictionaries are essentially descriptions of the distribution of language units
(usually word) in terms of linguistic and cultural contexts thought in general the
cultural contexts the predominate(Eugina A Nida, 1975: 1). According to Nida the
concept of equivalence as one of the key words in translation studies in the word
(Nida 1974:164).
Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and
content.This means, for example, that the message in the receptor culture is constantly
compared with the message in the source culture to determine the standards of
accuracy and correctness" ( Nida1964:159). The characteristic of formal equivalence
follows:
2
1) Grammatical Units:
a) Rendering noun by noun, verb by verb, adjective by adjective and etc.
b) Maintaining the intactness of all phrases and sentences (the units are split
up readjusted).
c) Preserving all formal indicators such as mark on punctuation, paragraph,
and poetic indentation.
2) Reproduce Consistency in word usage aimed at concordance of terminology
Reproduce meanings in terms of the source context.
The other side is Dynamic equivalence is defined as a translation principle
according to which a translator seeks to translate the meaning of the original in such a
way that the TL wording will trigger the same impact on the TC audience as the
original wording did upon the ST audience.
The characteristic of dynamic equivalence follows:
1) Equivalent referring to the source language message.
2) Natural which points toward the target language.
3) Closest which ties to orientation on the basic of highest degree of
approximation.
Finally, it should be noted that these two methods are not absolute techniques but
rather general orientations. In fact, what experienced translators seem to do most
of the time is to resort to a formal kind of equivalence initially, reconsider the
decision in the light of a range of factors, and ultimately make a choice between
formal or dynamic equivalence (Hatim & Munday, 2004).
Research Method
This Research is conduct by using descriptive qualitative design started from
design of the research, source of the data, research instrument, procedures of
collecting data, and procedures of analyzing data. Qualitative research is type of
research which refers to the meaning, concept, definition, characteristics, metaphors,
symbol and description of things (Berg 2007: 3).
Source of data in this research is taken from students’ translated text of Bahasa
Indonesia into English. The data are in the form of text includes phrases, sentence or
paragraph of spoof text. This research investigates the equivalence level of students’
translated text according theory of Nida. The writer also asks to the lecture who gives
assignment for student. Here the example of source of data from students’ translated
text of Bahasa Indonesia into English.
Picture. Data of students’ translated text
3
The writer applied main instrument and second instrument. They are human
instrument and document. It means that the researcher was the instrument for
measuring data and should be sensitive to what happen in noting the data. On the
other hand, the theory analysis means that the writer analyze the data by using
theoretical of equivalence translation. The function of the researcher as “human
instrument “ is that the researcher observe deeply, collects the data, analyzes and also
interprets the data collected of the object of this research. As instrument, the writer
plan, collects the data, analyzes, and also interprets the data (Moleong, 1989:131).
Based on the theory above the writer chooses some steps in analyzing the data
as follows:
1. Classifying the data into some groups based on Nida’s theory formal and
dynamic equivalence.
2. Analyzing the equivalence level from the source language into target language
(SL to TL)
3. Analyzing and interpreting the data based on the information of the analysis and
making a general interpretation / discussion of the interpreted data.
4. Drawing conclusion.
Finding and Discussion
In this chapter the writer provide the Finding in the research and discussion of
the data. The researcher obtains the data to find out the purpose an analysis result of
students’ translated text at English Student Department of 2012 D. The writer
describes and analyzes the equivalence level in term of formal and dynamic
equivalence. To answer the research questions, based on the statement problem of
study. The finding and discussion covers, Classify, describe, and analysis. The
findings of formal and dynamic equivalence level are as follows:
1. Formal Equivalence
Datum FE 1.1
Source Language
: Menebak Usia Mumi.
Target Language
: Guessing the age of mummy.
Based on the data FE 1.1, show that the data indicated in formal equivalence
that is including in grammatical unit. In the sentence above can be seen that the
student translated text word by word. For example the word mumi translated by
mummy is just imitating the word from SL to ST. The sentence gives structural
equivalence or a glass translation. The sentence also reproduces meanings in term of
the source context. The grammatical units is rendering noun by noun, verb by verb
and adjective by adjective etc. For example menebak translated by guess it show
function as verb by verb. So, in that case the sentence include on formal equivalence
translation. This sentence appears clearly in grammatical units. See the table analyze
of grammatical units bellow.
Word /Phrase Function
Word/Phrase
Function
Menebak
Verb
Guessing
Verb
Age
Noun
Usia
Noun
Mummy
Noun
Mumi
Noun
Datum FE 1.2
Source Language
: Ini cerita Gus Dur beberapa tahun yang lalu, sewaktu jaman
orde baru.
Target Language
: It was the story of Gus Dur a couple years ago, when he was
in the new Order.
4
In the sentence 2, the words are rendering grammatical unit. The word ini
translated by it as adverb by adverb, cerita translated by story the position as noun by
noun. beberapa tahun translated by a couple years ago it indicates phrase by phrase.
The student translated sentence follow the characteristic of formal equivalence that is
reproduces consistency in word usage aimed at concordance of terminology. This
sentence also using preserve all formal indicators that is punctuation mark coma. And
reproduce meanings in terms of the source context. It means the student transfer
source language into target language originally. The sentence whole units are not split
up readjusted. See the data of rendering words bellow.
Word /Phrase
Function
Word/Phrase Function
Ini
Noun
It
Noun
Cerita
Noun
Story
Noun
Gus Dur
Noun
Gus Dur
Noun
Beberapa
Noun
A couple
Noun
Tahun
Noun
Years
Noun
Yang lalu
Adverb
Ago
Adverb
Sewaktu
Conjunction
When
Conjunction
Orde baru
Phrase
New order
Phrase
2. Dynamic Equivalence
Datum DE 1.1
Source Language: Pemerintah pun bangga bukan kepalang
Target Language: The government of Indonesia extremely proud with it
The data presented about dynamic equivalence. With that entire translator
seeks to translate the meaning of the original in such a way that the Target Language
wording will trigger the same impact on the Target language audience as the original
wording did upon the Source Target audience. The sentence include in all form of
dynamic equivalence. Such as referring to the source language message. Natural
points toward the target language. For example the word pemerintah translated by the
goverment of indonesia and the phrase bukan kepalang translated by extremaly with it
whereas, the word extramaly is has same meaning sangat . So, here the student
translates the sentence as natural as possible. That is the reason the sentence include
dynamic equivalence. And the student give the basis of the highest degree of
approximation.
Datum DE 1.2
Source Language: Pemerintah Indonesia, Namanya juga Jaman.
Target Language: Indonesia was, no wonder because it was.
The sentence above is uncompleted sentence. Here the complete
sentencepemerintah Indonesia lain dari yang lain. Namanya juga aman orde baru
yang waktu itu masih bergaya represif missal banyaknya penculikan para aktifis
translated byIndonesia was different than the other, no wonder because it was new
order period when it was still repressive for example it was many activist abduction
at the time. The sentence above is followed in dynamic equivalence because the
message referring to the source language. It sentence close which ties to orientation
on the basis of the basic of the high degree. For example pemerintah Indonesia
translated by Indonesia, namanya translated by no wonder. Whereas, no wonder is
equivalent with tak heran in this case the message is receive in society. That way the
natural point toward the target language happens in this case.
5
Discussion
Based on the finding the equivalence of translation through students’
translated text of Bahasa Indonesia into English. The writer describes the data with
connecting in the theory from many experts. The experts have definition about
language, translation, and equivalence each other, but the point of it is as a whole is
same.
Translation is a craft consisting in the attempt to replace a written message or
statement in one language by the same message or statement in another language
(Newmark,1981:7).
From the definitions mentioned above, it is found that translation is a process
which is intended to find meaning equivalence in the target text. If the writer relate
between newmark statement in finding the student translate one language to another
language it try to replace message from both language that are Bahasa Indonesia into
English.
For example :
SL
: Gus Dur dan ajudanya terlibat percakapan serius.
TL
: Gus Dur and his adjutant have a serious conversation
SL
: Cerita tentang seyembara menebak usia mumi di Giza Mesir
TL
: A story about the contest of guessing the age of mummy in Giza, Egypt
The data presented above is transfer message or replace language. There are
two thing can be big attention from the newmark definition. The first, newmark
thought that a translation is only written text. It possible to make different with
interpretation or here is oral translation. So from the example above we can see the
student translation is appropriate with newmark theory.
The example of formal equivalence
Source Language: Pakar amerika perlu waktu yang lama, tapi taksirannya keliru.
Target Language: the Americans expert need a long time, but his guesstimate is
wrong.
Formal equivalence is source oriented which is designed to produce as much
as possible of the form and content of the original message. Look the sentence bellow
can be seen clearly that the student translate the sentence word by word. No adding
information, no remove the theme or expressing. For example tapi taksirannya keliru
translated by but his guesstimate is wrong. This sentence reproduces meanings in term
of the source context the original message. This sentence reproduces consistency in
word usage aimed at concordance of terminology. For example Pakar amerika perlu
waktu yang lama translated by the Americans’ expert needs a long time. This sentence
indicates grammatical units rendering verb by verb in the word butuh translated by
need. Maintaining the intactness of all phrases for example waktu yang lama
translated by long time. Maintaining the intactness of all sentence Pakar amerika
perlu waktu yang lama, tapi taksirannya keliru translated by the Americans expert
need a long time, but his guesstimate is wrong. And the last is preserving all formal
indicators such as mark of punctuation for example coma.
The example of dynamic equivalence
Source Language: Pemerintah pun bangga bukan kepalang
Target Language: The government of Indonesia extremely proud with it
The data presented about dynamic equivalence. With that entire translator
seeks to translate the meaning of the original in such a way that the Target Language
wording will trigger the same impact on the Target language audience as the original
wording did upon the Source Target audience. The sentence inlude in all form of
dynamic equivalence. Such as referring to the source language message. Natural
6
points toward the target language. For example the word pemerintah translated by the
goverment of indonesia and the phrase bukan kepalang translated by extremaly with it
whereas, the word extremaly is has same meaning sangat . So, here the student
translates the sentence as natural as possible. That is the reason the sentence include
dynamic equivalence. And the student give the basis of the highest degree of
approximation. The highest degree means that the translator translates source
language into target language use different word even the paraphrase, but the message
itself same from source language.
Conclusion
This study concern on equivalence of translation based on Nidas’ theory they
are formal and dynamic equivalence. The writer analyzes the students translated text
of Bahasa Indonesia into English. The writer also divides the result of students
translated text in formal and dynamic equivalence sentence by sentence.
Based on data, students translated text. The writer describes the both
equivalence they are formal and dynamic equivalence are different types. Many
students translate indicated on formal than dynamic equivalence. The formal
equivalence followed, Grammatical Units, reproduce consistency in word usage
aimed at concordance of terminology, and reproduce meanings in terms of the source
context. Meanwhile, dynamic equivalence followed, equivalent referring to the source
language message, natural which points toward the target language, closest which ties
orientation on the basic of highest degree of approximation.
Actually, translation is basically a process of conveying meaning of given a
linguistic discourse of language to other language more just transferring word or
grammatical structure of the SL. The Meaning of this word is not only determined by
the referred object or idea, but it is also governed by the use of the words or phrases in
a certain way context and effect.
When we try to find the equivalence, we are faced with text as unit of meaning,
even in the form of sets of words or sentences. It is important to note that language is
used as a communication means, so in translating a text we should remember that “A
text is a whole entity, to be translated as a whole”. Accordingly, the message itself so
important among formal and dynamic equivalence are different style. From both ways
to through equivalence dynamic equivalence is better than formal because dynamic
translate texts as natural as possible. Sometime people more understand the language
style of their language their self because different language is different style. Dynamic
equivalence one equivalent who applies closes natural equivalent to the source
language message.
SUGGESTION
Based on the researcher of the study, the writer gives some suggestions related
to translation study and the deeper of it, either the English teacher or the next
researcher in order to more understand this study and look for more this study in other
field. Because of even from education program, not only have teaching but also
linguistics competence. Practicing lectures can use the result as additional guidance to
develop their teaching techniques and overcome the problem of the difficulties of
translating the word
For sociolinguistics students, it is hoped that by knowing the result of this
study, they would know the students’ translated text and its equivalences. Exactly, at
that time they translate Bahasa Indonesia to English or conversely English to Bahasa
Indonesia.
7
This study has analyzed about Equivalence of translation a case study on
students’ translated text of Bahasa Indonesia into English based on Nidas’ theory. So
it cannot take all aspect that relate with student error analysis. For this reason, in next
analysis better if consider the other aspect for example cause of student do the mistake
when they translate one language to other language and the implication for English
teacher. Accordingly, the result of this research can help the readers especially student
and English teacher in learning process.
Bibliography
Alexander, Christopher. 1977. A Pattern Language. United State of America.
Library of Congress Catalogue.
Arikunto, S. 2010. Prosedur Penelitian. Jakarta. Rineka Cipta.
Benjamins. 2011. Methods and Strategies of Process Research. American. Library
of Congress Cataloging.
Bernofsky, S. and Alen. 2013. In Translation. New York. Columbia University
Press.
Benjamins, John. 1984. Triangulating Translation. USA: Benyamins Publised
Company.
Baker, Mona (1992). In Other Words, A Coursebook on Translation. London:
Routledge
Bell, Roger T. 1991. Translation and Translating: Theory and Practice. London:
Longman.
Catford, J. C. 1965. A Linguistic Theory of translation. London. Oxford University
Press
Croitoru, Elena. 1996. Interpretation and Translation. Galati: Editura Porto-Franco.
Dollerup, Cay. 2006. Basics of Translation Studies. Iasi: Institutul European.
Felistyana, Inge N.2008.Analisis Penerjemahan.Jakarta.Universitas Indonesia
Haryanto, Sugeng. 2005. “Subtitling: Di antara Keterbatasan Bahasa-Budaya dan
Media”.Collection of International Conference on Translation:Translation,
Discourse andCulture. Program Pascasarjana: UNS.
Lewandowska, Barbara.2010.Studies in Language. Deutche Nationalbibliothek.Peter
Lang GmbH
Lorscher, W. 1991.Translation performance, translation process, and translation
strategies. A psycholinguistic investigation. Tubingen: Guten Narr.
Munday, Jeremy . 2001. Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applicatio.
London and New York:Routledge.
Mollanazzar,H.2001.Naturalness in the Translation of novels from English to
Persian (On line in unpublished PHD Thesis). University of warwick.
Munday, Jeremy. 2001. Introducing Translation Studies. Theories and applications.
London: Routledge Group.
Moleong, J. Lexy. 2011. Metode Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung
:Remaja Rosda Karya.
Nababan, P.W.J. 2008.Teori Menterjemah Bahasa Inggris. Jakarta. Gramedia
Newmark, Peter. 1988. A Text Book of Translation. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inch.
Nirenburg, Sergei. 2003. Reading In Machine Translation.United State of America.
Library of Congress Cataloging
Nida,Eugine A.,and Charles R.Taber.1974. The Theory and Practice of
Translation. Leiden,E.J.Bill.
Nida,Eugene A.1975.Language Structure And Translation.USA.stanford university
8
press.
Nida, Eugene A and Taber. 1969. The Theory and Practice of translation.
Leiden:E.J.Brill.
Nord, C. (1991). Text Analysis in Translation: Theory Methodology and didactic
Application of Model for Translation-Oriented Text Analysis.
Nugroho, Andi B. 2009. Meaning and Translation.Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta State
University.
Robinson, Douglas. 2007. An Introduction to the Theory and Practice of
Translation.USA and London.
Snell-Hornby, Mary. 1995. Translation Studies An Intergrated Approach. USA.
John Benyamins Publised Company.
Steiner, George.1975. Aspect and language of Translation.America.AmazonBooks
Toury,G 1995. Descriptive translation studies beyond. Amsterdam: Benjamins
Library
Tjandra, Sheddy N. 2005. Masalah Penerjemah dan Terjemahan Jepang Indonesia
Jakarta: Aksarakarya.
Venuti Lawrence. 2012. The Translation Studies Reader.USA.Library of congress
Cataloging in Pulication data.
9
Lampiran
THE DATUM OF FORMAL AND DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE LEVEL
Formal equivalence
Datum FE 1.1
SL: Menebak Usia Mumi.
TL: Guessing the age of mummy.
Datum FE 1.2
SL : Ini cerita Gus Dur beberapa tahun
yang lalu, sewaktu jaman orde baru.
TL: It was the story of Gus Dur a couple
years ago, when he was in the new Order
Datum FE 1.3
SL: Cerita tentang seyembara menebak
usia mumi di Giza, Mesir.
TL: A story about the contest of guessing
the age of mummy in Giza, Egypt.
Datum FE 1.4
SL:Puluhan negara diundang oleh
pemerintah mesir, untuk mengirimkan tim
ahli paleontrologinya yang terbaik.
TL: Many countries were invited by the
government of Egypt, to send their best
Paleoanthropologist
Datum FE 1.5
SL: Tapi, lain dari yang lain, orde baru
yang waktu itu masih bergaya represif
missal banyaknya penculikan aktivis.
TL: But, different than the others, new
order period when it was still repressive
for example it was many activist
abduction at that time.
Dynamic equivalence
Datum DE 1.1
SL: Pemerintah pun bangga bukan
kepalang
TL: The government of Indonesia
extremely proud with it
Datum DE 1.2
SL: Pemerintah Indonesia, Namanya
juga Jaman
TL: Indonesia was, no wonder because
it was
Datum DE 1.3
SL: Pak komandan dengan enteng
menjawab “saya gebuki ngaku dia”
TL: The commander answer is easily
“ I just bowed him, and finally he
confessed about his age”
Datum DE 1.4
SL: Tim Jerman menyatakan usia
mumi itu tiga ribu dua ratus tahun lebih
sedikit, juga salah.
TL: Germany team claimed that the
age of this mummy was few more 200
years old, it was wrong too.
Datum DE 4.5
Source Language: Akibatnya, dua
orang diantara kuli-kuli itu terlibat
percekcokan serius dalam bahasa arab.
Target Language: Finally, two porters
are quarreling to get the passenger at
that time.
Datum FE 1.6
SL:Makanya, pemerintah mengirimkan
seorang aparat yang komandan intel.
TL: So, the Government sent an agency
who was a commander of an intelligent
agent.
Datum FE5.6
SL:Suatu ketika seorang priyayi
kotaberjalan jalan ke kampung.
TL: Once, a city has sign seeing into the
village.
Datum FE 1.7
SL: Tim perancis tampil pertama kali
membawa peralatan mutakhir, ukur sana,
ukur sini,catat ini dan itu kemudian
menyerah tidak sanggup.
TL: France team appeared first, they
brought the latest tools, they measured
Datum DE5.7
SL:Merasa dirinya sudah diselamatkan,
sang priyayi menawarkan “imbalan”
kepada sang petani.
TL: Felt to be saved, the priyayi offer a
“reward” to the farmer.
10
here and measured there, take a note these
and take a note those then they gave up
and they couldn’t.
Datum FE 1.8
SL: Pakar amerika perlu waktu yang
lama, tapi taksirannya keliru.
SL: the Americans expert need a long
time, but his guesstimate is wrong.
Datum DE5.8
SL:Berkali kali sang priyayi berteriak
minta tolong. Dalam posisi hampir
sekarat. Datanglah seorang petani desa
memberikan pertolongan.
TL: The Priyayi screaming for help,
Then many times village farmer to give
him up.
11