8

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Translation

Translation is basically a kind of communication and it has always functioned as a bridge for people who do not know foreign languages to understand the source language. The translation should be understood as the process by which a message is expressed in a specific source language and the specific source language is linguistically transformed in order to be understood by readers of the target language.

Etymologically, translation is a carrying across or bringing across : the Latin translatio derives from transferre (trans, across + ferre, to carry or to bring. Concerning the term of translation, it can be recognized the distinction between translation namely as process, product and as concept. As the process (translating), it is the activity rather than the tangible object, as the product (a translation), it is the process of translating and as concept (translation), it encompasses both the process of translating and the product of that process. It is necessary to understand the concept of translation to obtain an overall picture of the translation process because translation is a complicated task, during which the meaning of the source language text should be conveyed to the target language readers. In other words, translation can be defined as encoding the meaning and form in the target language by means of the decoded meaning and form of the source language.

Different theorists state various definitions for translation. Catford (1965) views translation as the replacement of textual material in one language (source language) by the equivalent text material in another language (target language). Nida and Taber (1974) state that translating consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source language message. They state that translation is closely related to the problems of languages, meaning, and equivalence. Newmark (1988:5) defines translation as rendering the meaning of a text into another language in the way that the author intended the text. This definition stresses on rendering meaning of the source language text into the target language. Pickent (1989) defines that general translation is a method of transferring oral and written messages from writing to speech or from one language to another.

Bensoussan (1990) states that translation is closely related to the reading process. Bell (1991) views translation as the replacement of a text in one language by an equivalent text in another language.

Larson (1998:15) states that there are two kinds of translation. They are literal translation and idiomatic translation.

1. Literal translation is a form-based translation attempting to follow the form of the source language. In other words, literal translation sounds like nonsense and has little communication value for example if we compare literal translation and appropriate translation in asking someones name.

2. Idiomatic translation is a meaning-based translation that makes every effort to communicate the meaning of the source language text in the natural form of the receptor language.

Hatim and Munday (2004:6) define translation as the process of transferring a written text from source language (SL) to target language (TL). In this definition, they emphasize on translation as a process to determine whether the source text meaning had been transferred into the target text or not at all.

From the definitions mentioned above, it can be said that translation is a process which is intended to find meaning equivalence in the target text. Therefore, translation can be explained as a decision-making process and a problem-solving task. 2.2 Translation Process

Various translation theorists described translation process - analyzing source text, drafting target text, and evaluating target text differently as of the followings:

(1) Nida (1975), and Bell (1998) pointed out that translation process could be divided into three stages: 1) analyzing, 2) synthesizing, and 3) revising. Firstly, translators determine what the author wants to say and decode signs of the source language to discover what the sign mean as parts of a message. Next, translators have to restructure the stylistically and semantically equivalent expression in target language in a way that is most appropriate for the target audience. Finally, translators verify the draft in order that a proposed equivalence perfectly translates the full meaning of the original text. (2) Mason (1998) proposed four steps in translation. Firstly, translators select the lexical and grammatical items in the target language, which are close enough to convey the message and to make that, are required in the target language. Then, they consider the genre of the text to use appropriate grammatical sequence in the translation. The next step is to apply the convention of the genre in the target language into the translated version. The final step is repairing any miscommunication that may occur in target text. (3) Larson (1984) divided the translation process into four stages: (1) establishing the project main focus relies on analyzing intension of source-text authors and target-text translators, and target-text audience profile; (2) exegesis mainly involves capturing source-text meaning, the authors purpose and the theme of the text, as well as communication situation, (3) transfer and rework the initial draft, (4) testing and revising final draft there are five ways of testing a translation, as follows: (i) comparing with the source text; (ii) back-translating into the source language; (iii) comprehension testing; (iv) naturalness and readability testing; and (v) consistency testing.Implied from the preceding frameworks of translation process, technical term translation might be implemented in three stages: (1) analyzing word meaning, (2) employing word-level translation strategies in translation, and (3) testing translation quality.2.3 Translation Equivalence

Translation equivalence is a principal concept in Western translation theory. It is a constitutive feature and the guiding principle of translation. In 1950s and 1960s, some translation theorists place translation equivalence at an important position in their theories, and equivalence becomes a key standard for the judgment of translation quality and a core comcept in western translation studies.

Translation equivalence is a relative concept for the loss of source languages information during translation process is inevitable, and translators can only help to reduce such loss and achieve the equivalence as possible as it could be, which depends on how to deal with cultural differences and how to successfully transfer distinguished features of the source culture in target language. As Catford points out, the central problem of translation-practice is that of finding target language equivalents. A central task of translation theory is that of defining the nature and conditions of translation equivalence. According to Hornby (1988:17), for the last 150 years, the word equivalence in English has been used as a technical term in different kinds of exact sciences to refer to a number of scientific phenomena or processes. In other words, the word equivalence is used in the English language both as scientific term and as a common word.

Philosophically speaking there are no things that are absolutely identical. Nida (1986: 60) expresses There are no two stone alike, no flowers the same, and no two people who are identical. Although the structures of the DNA in the nucleus of their cells may be the same, such persons nevertheless differ as the result of certain developmental factors. No two sounds are ever exactly alike, and even the same person pronouncing the same words will never utter it in an absolutely identical manner. Related to the statement, there are two words in any two languages are completely identical in meaning. It can be said that there are no words that have exactly the same meaning in one language.

Equivalence can be said to be the central issue in translation although its definition, relevance, and applicability within the field of translation theory have caused heated controversy, and many different theories of the concept of equivalence have been elaborated within this field in the past fifty years. Numerous linguistic scholars recognized the importance of seeking a proper equivalence during translation process. Not surprisingly, equivalence plays a crucial role in translation which is the matter of establishing equivalence between source language and target language. 2.3.1 The Concept of Equivalence

The concept of equivalence has been of particular concern to translation scholars since it has been linked with both definitional and practical aspects of translating. Equivalence is meant to indicate that source text and target text share some kind of sameness. As the example, the Indonesian phrase kambing hitam is not always translated as black goat in English language. If it means a goat which is black, the phrase can be translated as a black goat. However, if it has a specific meaning a person who is blamed for something that someone else has done, it will be equivalent with the English phrase scapegoat. In line with equivalence, the translation theorists have made a critical evaluation of the concept of equivalence namely :

1. Vinay and Darbelnet (1958) produce a comparative stylistic analysis of the different translation strategies and procedures used in French and English. They distinguish between direct and oblique translation. They propose seven procedures, the first three covered by direct translation and the remaining four by oblique translation. These procedures are borrowing, calque, literal translation, transposition, modulation, equivalence and adaptation. In particular, the equivalence is viewed as a procedure in which the same situation is replicated as in the original but different wording is used.2. Jakobson (1959) states that there are three kinds of translation, that is, intralingual (rewording or paraphrasing within one language), interlingual (rewording or paraphrasing between two languages) and intersemiotic (rewording or paraphrasing between sign system). He immediately stresses the fact that there can be no full equivalence between two words. There are similarities between Jakobson an Vinay and Darbelnets theory of translation. They both argue that translation is possible despite cultural or grammatical differences between source language and target language.3. Nida and Taber (1964) say that there are two basic types of equivalence namely formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. The concept closest natural equivalent is explained by Nida namely, equivalent which points toward the source language message, natural which points toward the receptor language, closest, which binds the two orientations together on the basis of the highest degree of approximation.4. Catford (1965) describes very broad types of translation according to three criteria. Firstly, full translation is contrasted with partial translation which differs according to the extent of translation. Secondly, total translation differs from restricted translation according to the levels of language involved in translation and thirdly, Catford distinguishes between rank-bound translation and unbounded translation, depending on the grammatical or phonological rank at which equivalence is established. The third type of translation is regarded with equivalence. 5. Koller (1979) describes a detailed examination of the concept of equivalence and its linked term correspondence. In particular, correspondence involves the comparison of two language systems where differences and similarities are described contrastively, whereas equivalence deals with equivalent items in specific source text target text pairs and context. Koller distinguishes five different types of equivalence namely denotative equivalence involving the extralinguistic content of a text, connotative equivalence relating to lexical choices, text-normative equivalence relating to text-types, pragmatic equivalence involving the receiver of the text or message and finally, formal equivalence relating to the form and aesthetics of the text. 6. Newmark (1988) replaces Nidas terms of formal and dynamic equivalence with semantic and communicative translation respectively. Semantic translation focuses on meaning whereas communicative translation concentrates on effect. In other words, semantic translation looks back at the source text and tries to retain its characteristics as much as possible. On the other hand, communicative translation looks toward the needs of the addresses, thus trying to satisfy them as much as possible. 7. Baker (1992) addresses the vexing issue of equivalence by adopting a more neutral approach when she argues that equivalence is a relative notion because it is influenced by a variety of linguistic and cultural factors. Adopting a bottom-up approach, Baker acknowledges the importance of individual words during the translation process, since rhe translator looks firstly at the words as single units in order to find their equivalent in the target language. Baker goes on to provide a definition of the term word referring to its complex nature since a single word can sometimes be assigned different meanings in different languages. According to Baker (1992), there are five types of equivalent namely equivalence at word level, equivalence above word level, grammatical equivalence , textual equivalence and pragmatic equivalence. She said that the difficulty and problem in translating from one language into another is posed by the concept of non equivalence, or lack of equivalence. This problem appears at all language levels starting from the word level up till the textual level. Baker discusses various equivalence problems and their possible solutions at word, above word, grammatical, textual and pragmatic levels. She claims translators must not underestimate the cumulative effect of thematic choices on the way we interpret text (ibid:129). She acknowledges the fact that there are translation problems caused by non equivalence. 8. House (1997) has come up with a translation model in which the basic requirement for equivalence of source text and target text is that original and translation should match one another in function. This function should be achieved by employing equivalent pragmatic means. House has distinguished between two basic types of translation, namely, over translation and covert translation. 9. Pym (2010) makes his own contribution to the concept of equivalence by pointing out that there is no such thing as perfect equivalence between languages and it is always assumed equivalence. According to Pym, equivalence is a relation of equal value between an source text segment and a target text segment and can be established on any linguistic level from form to function. He goes on to distinguish between natural and directional equivalence.

In conclusion, it could be argued that many translation theories are based on two opposing ways of translating. For example, Nida distinguishes between formal and dynamic equivalence, Newmark between semantic and communicative translation, Catford between formal correspondence and textual equivalence. House between overt and covert translation and Pym between natural and directional equivalence. 2.3.2 Equivalence at word level

According to Baker (1992), an effective translation is a translation that fulfills parameters which consist of five criteria. In line with this, she explains that the organization of these criteria is based on a principle which starts with the simplest possible level and grows in complexity by widening its focus on each criterion. Those criterion are as in the following :

(1) Equivalence at word level : It is the meaning of single words and expressions.(2) Equivalence above word level : It explores combinations of words and phrases (stretches of language)(3) Grammatical equivalence : It deals with grammatical categories; (4) Textual equivalence : It discusses the text level (word order, cohesion, etc.); (5) Pragmatic equivalence : It is how texts are used in communicative situations that involves variables such as writers, readers, and cultural context.

As the means indicates, this type of equivalence focuses on one of the smallest linguistic units of a language the word. In any act of communication, and therefore in any study of language, words play an essential role, not just in relation to their linguistic formation but also in relation to the semantic features that they carry with them.

Baker (1992) asks herself what a translator does when there is no word in the target language which expresses the same meaning as the source language word especially for translating a jargon or slang for example :

1. SL : He has bad blood with her.

TL : Dia memiliki darah buruk dengannya.2. SL : Btw, where did she put her bag ?

TL : Btw, di mana dia letakkan tasnya ?

In the first example is example darah buruk should be translated as hubungan yang buruk and different case occurs in the second example. The abbreviation btw is a jargon commonly used in online chatting to replace the phrase by the way which is translated into omong-omong in Indonesian. Words that are combined should be translated in the correct meaning otherwise, the whole translation result will be weird.

The translators will concern with communicating the overall meaning of a stretch of language. To achieve this, we need to start by decoding the units and structures which carry that meaning. The smallest unit which we would expect to possess individual meaning is the word. The word is the smallest unit of language that can be used by itself. Meaning can be carried by units smaller than the word. The word rebuild consists of two distinct elements of meaning in it : re and build (the meaning is to build again). The same applies to disbelieve which may be paraphrased as not to believe. In order to isolate elements of meaning in words and deal with them more effectively, some linguists have suggested the term morpheme to describe the minimal formal element of meaning in language, as distinct from word, which may or may not contain several elements of meaning. To take an example from English, inconceivable is written as one word but consists of three morphemes : in (meaning not), conceive (meaning think or imagine) and able (meaning able to be, fit to be). A suitable paraphrase for inconceivable would then be cannot be conceived/imagined.

The lexical meaning of a word may be thought of as the specific value. It is rarely possible to analyse a word, pattern pr structure into distinct components of meaning ; the way in which language works is much too complex to allow that. According to Cruise (1986), there are four main types of meaning in words and utterances (utterances being stretches of written or spoken text) namely :

1. Propositional meaning of a word or an utterance arises from the relation between it and what it refers to or describes in a real or imaginary world, as conceived by the speakers of the particular language to which the word or utterance belongs. For instance, the propositional meaning of shirt is a piece of clothing worn on the upper part of the body. It would be inaccurate to use shirt, to refer to a piece of clothing worn on the foot, such as socks.2. Expressive meaning relates to the speakers feelings or attitude rather than to what words and utterances refer to. In this case, it cannot be judged as true or false. For instance, the difference between Dont complain and Dont whinge (informal UK) does not lie in their propositional meanings but in the expressiveness of whinge, which suggests that the speaker finds the action annoying. In other words, two or more words or utterances can therefore have the same propositional meaning but differ in their expressive meanings.

3. Presupposed meaning arises from co-occurance restrictions i.e restrictions on what other words or expressions we expect to see before or after a particular lexical unit. They consist of two types : a) selectional restrictions which are a function of the propositional meaning of a word and deliberately violated in the case of figurative language but are otherwise strictly observed for instance, we expect a human subject for the adjective studious and inanimate one for geometrical. b) Collocational restrictions which are semantically arbitrary restrictions which do not follow logically from the propositional meaning of a word. For instance, laws are broken in English, but in Arabic they are contradicted. In English , teeth are brushed, but in German and Italian, teeth are polished.4. Evoked meaning arises from dialect and register variation. The dialect is classified on one of such bases as geographical, e.q. American as opposed to British English (the difference between lift and elevator) ; temporal, i.e words and structures used by members of different age groups within a community, or words used at different periods in the history of a language (e.q verily and really) ; and social, i.e words and structures used by members of different social classes (e.q scent and perfume, napkin and serviette). Meanwhile, the register variations are based on the field, tenor and mode of discourse (Baker, 1992:15-17).

Different groups within each culture have different expectations about what kind of language is appropriate to particular situations. Therefore, sometimes people find difficulties to make their points because their language appears inappropriate to other participants.2.2.3 Non Equivalence at word level

In doing translation, the translators will try to attain the equivalence between source language and target language and according to Mona Baker, there are some common problems of non equivalence dealing with the equivalence at word level.

According to Baker (1992), the non equivalence at word level means the target language has no direct equivalent for a word which occurs in the source text. As the most outstanding theorist focusing on equivalence at word level, her theory was supported by Halliday (1985) who strongly stresses that meaning are realized through words, and without a theory of wordings, there is no way of making explicit ones interpretation of the meaning of the text. Additionally, in the book To Mean or Not to Mean ,the theorist Bayar (2007) also appreciates the significance of word level equivalence by affirming that equivalence designates an area of correspondence ranging around the word. She even involves the roles of lower units such as the phoneme or the morpheme. Magdalena (2005) accommodates the readers with a considerably comprehensive analysis on Bakers theory on non equivalence at word level before attempting to address specific problematic words and expressions between English and Polish.

Baker (1992) says that the choice of a suitable equivalent will always depend not only on the linguistic system or systems being handled by the translator, but also on the way both the writer of the source text and the producer of the target text choose to manipulate the linguistic systems in question. She acknowledges the common problems of non equivalence at word level and the strategies for dealing with them :(a) Culture-specific concepts The source-language word may express a concept which is totally unknown in the target language (abstract or concrete; it may relate to a religious belief, a social custom or even a type of food) eg. English concept difficult to translate: Speaker (of the House of Commons)- it has no equivalent in many languages, such as Russian, Chinese and Arabic, among others. It is often translated into Russian as Chairman, which does not reflect the role of the Speaker of the House of Commons as an independent person who maintains authority and order in Parliament.

(b) The source-language concept is not lexicalized in the target language The source-language word may express a concept which is known in the target culture but simply not lexicalized, that is not allocated a target-language word to express it, eg. the adjective standard (meaning ordinary, not extra, as is standard range of products) expresses a concept which is very accessible and readily understood by most people. (c) The source-language word is semantically complex The source-language word may be semantically complex to understand the right meaning from the source text.(d) The source and the target languages make different distinctions in meaning The target language may make more or fewer distinctions in meaning than the source language. For example, Indonesian makes a distinction between going out in the rain without the knowledge that is it raining (kehujanan) and going out in the rain with the knowledge that it is raining (hujan-hujanan). English does not makes that distinction, with the result that if an English text referred to going out in the rain, the Indonesian translator may find it difficult to choose the right equivalent.(e) The target language lacks a superordinate

The target language may have specific words (hyponyms) but no general word (superordinate) to head the semantic field

(f) The target language lacks a specific term (hyponym) More commonly, languages tend to have general words (superordinates) but lack specific ones (hyponyms), eg. under house, English again has a variety of hyponyms which have no equivalents in many languages, for example bungalow, cottage, croft, chalet, lodge, hut, mansion, manor and villa. (g) Differences in physical or interpersonal perspective Physical perspective has to do with where things or people are in relation to one another or to a place, as expressed in pairs of words such as come/ go, take/ bring, arrive/ depart, etc. h) Differences in expressive meaning There may be a target-text which has the same propositional meaning as the source-text but it may have a different expressive meaning. If the target-language equivalent is neutral compared to the source-language item, the translator can sometimes add the evaluative element by means of a modifier or adverb if necessary, or by building it in somewhere else in the text.(i) Differences in form

There is often no equivalent in the target language for a particular form in the source text, eg. English makes frequent use of suffixes such as V-ish (e.g. boyish, hellish, greenish) and V-able (e.g. conceivable, retrievable, drinkable). (j) Differences in frequency and purpose of using specific forms

Seven when a particular form does have a ready equivalent in the target language, there may be a difference in the frequency with which it is used or the purpose for which it is used, eq. English, for instance, uses the continuous Verb-ing form for binding clauses much more frequently than other languages.(k) The use of loan words in the source text Some words are used for showing a prestige value. This is often lost in translation because it is not always possible to find a loan word with the same meaning in the target language. This means that only the propositional meaning can be rendered into another language.

Dealing with the various types of non equivalence at word level, some professional translators have used some strategies such as :

1. Translation by a more general word (superordinate) : The use of a general word (superordinate) to overcome a relative lack of specificity in the target text compared to the source text for example shampooing. It can be seen as a type of washing, we can wash lots of things but we can only shampoo hair. This is the way to cover the core propositional meaning of the missing hyponym in the target text.

2. Translation by a more neutral/less expressive word : If there is no equivalent word, the word is lost in translation for example exotic. It has no equivalent in Chinese because it is a word used by westerners. It is sometimes possible to retain expressive meaning by adding a modifier.

3. Translation by cultural substitution : This strategy involves replacing a culture specific item. It gives the reader a concept with which she can identify, something familiar and appealing for example alice in Wonderland.

4. Translation by using a loan word or loan word plus explanation : The loan word with an explanation is very useful when the word in question is repeated several times in the text. Once explained, the loan word can be used on its own. The freedom to use loan words will often depend on the norms of translation prevailing in their societies. Arabic and French are much less tolerant of loan words than Japanese.

5. Translation by paraphrase using a related word : This strategy tends to be used when the concept expressed by the source item is lexicalized in the target language but in a different form.

6. Translation by paraphrase using unrelated words : The main advantage of the paraphrase strategy is that it achieves a high level of precision in specifying propotional meaning.

7. Translation by omission : This strategy may sound rather drastic, but in fact it does no harm to omit translating a word or expression in some contexts. If the meaning conveyed by a particular item or expression is not vital enough , translators often do simply omit translating the word or expression in question.

8. Translation by illustration : This is useful option if the word which lacks an equivalent in the target text refers to a physical entity which can be illustrated, particularly if there are restrictions on space and if the text has to remain short, concise, and to the point.

2.4 Previous Research or Related Studies

For supporting this research, there are related studies from some researchers who conduct their research in line with the topic of this thesis. (1) The Problem of Non-equivalence: Possible Strategies for Dealing with It. (Krej, Veronika:2008). It deals with the issue of non-equivalence and possible strategies for dealing with it. It includes explanations of different types of equivalence as well as translational methods and approaches. Another part of this thesis is called Analysis. It is composed of practical examples of nonequivalence and used translational strategies. It is based on the comparison of the English book Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone, written by J. K. Rowling (London: Bloomsbury, 2000), and the translation of the book into Czech language Harry Potter a Kmen mudrc, made by Vladimr Medek (Praha: Albatros, 2002).

The theory is explained in the first part of the thesis. It begins with the theory of translation and over the problem of equivalence the work comes to the point of nonequivalence. In my opinion, the problem of non-equivalence should not be discussed until the logically preceding issues, such as the above mentioned, have been explained and that is why the problem of non-equivalence is discussed as far as the last chapter. The second part of the thesis is more practical; and therefore, more interesting for the reader. It is based on the comparison of the English book and its translation. While comparing these two books, the writer found that the translator, Vladimr Medek, translated many expressions by the method of word-for-word translation. However, not every expression can be translated in this manner; therefore, the translator had to apply other translational methods and strategies, which are described in the analytical part of the thesis.

According to the writer, the most interesting cases are those, where the translator encountered words in the source language (English), which do not have their counterparts in the target language (Czech). Vladimr Medek solved this situation by using his imagination in order to invent completely new words, which are also mentioned in the analytical part. To sum it up, the original book and its translation do not have to include the same words; however, they need to fulfil the same function. To achieve this, Vladimr Medek applied some of the translational methods and strategies; furthermore, he used his imagination for inventing new words. In my opinion, his translation is very satisfactory, because it remains close to the original purpose of the text and its cultural, historical and social background.

(2) An Analysis of Word-level Strategies in Marketing Technical Terms Translation from English into Thai (Songwut, Burimjitt : 2007). The objective of this study was to analyze Mona Bakers translation strategies and the translation quality in translating 175 English marketing technical terms in the textbook entitled Business: A Changing World into 178 Thai-translated terms.

The findings illustrated that 25 patterns of combined strategies were employed. Furthermore, the eight major strategies most-frequently found included literal translation (43.93%), paraphrasing using related words (31.15%), general or specific words (10.82%), omission paraphrasing using related words (11.32%), omission (3.77%), illustration (3.46%), more or less expressive words (3.14%), loan words (1.89%), and paraphrasing using unrelated words (1.31%) respectively. However, loan words plus explanation and cultural substitution were not found in this text. Amongst the 25 patterns of Bakers strategies employed in 178 Thai-translated terms, 18 patterns were combined with multiple-strategies of which the two combined patterns dominantly found were literal translation + paraphrasing with related word (32.02%), and general or specific words + paraphrasing with related word (4.43%). Additionally, three English technical terms were translated in 2 versions with the emphasis on accuracy or clearness in translation. Implied from the findings, English and Thai technical terms are mostly nonequivalent in terms of word structure and semantic components. Therefore, technical terms translation should be more concentrated on clearness and naturalness rather than accuracy in translation. However, the target texts can achieve the three qualifications of effective translation at the same time should multiple-strategies of translation be systematically integrated based on the target audience analysis.

In conclusion, the translators mostly applied multiple-strategies to deal with cultural, structural, and semantic differences in order that the target-text could be effectively translated in terms of clearness, naturalness, and accuracy respectively.

(3) Equivalence at Word Level in Translation (Ivanov, Doina : 2011). This article has taken shape as a result of translation activity when, as a translator, he encountered difficulties in finding the right equivalent for a word in the target language. Equivalence is always relative, it can be obtained only to some extend as it is influenced by linguistic and cultural factors. The text is situated in its context of culture and the translator does textual analysis, an essential preliminary to translation, and wordings analysis, in order to understand the meanings of individual forms and to interpret the meaning of the text as a whole. There are lots of theoretical arguments in specialized literature which suggest that translation is an impossible task, that it is doomed to failure because languages are never sufficiently similar to express the same realities. According to him, we live in a world of globalization and translation has brought people of different cultural and lilnguistic backgrounds closer together and has built bridges of understanding and appreciation among different societies. There can arise translation problems from lack of equivalence at word level; what does a translator do when there is no word in the target language which expresses the same meaning as the source language word?

Before discussing about non-equivalence the writer has a look at the significance of the main unit of meaning in language, the word. It is defined as the smallest unit of language that can be used by itself.

Here, the writer also strengthen his discussion about the specific problems of non-equivalence. He proposed some types of non-equivalence that pose difficulties for the translator. The choice of a suitable equivalent in a given context depends on a wide variety of factors. Some of these factors may be strictly linguistic (for instance collocations and idioms). Other factors may be extralinguistic.

When a translator makes a choice of a suitable equivalent s/he will always take into account not only on the linguistic system or systems being handled by her/him, but also on the following factors, i.e. (i) The way the translator chooses to manipulate the linguistic systems in question; (ii) The expectations, background knowledge and prejudices of readers within a specific temporal and spatial location; (iii) The translators own understanding of their task, including their assessment of what is appropriate in a given situation; and (iv) A range of restrictions that may operate in a given environment at a given point in time, including censorship and various types of intervention by parties other than the translator, author, and reader.

It is also explined in this paper about non-equivalence at word level. It is meant that the target language has no direct equivalent for a word which occurs in the source text. There are some common types of non-equivalence at word level such as (a) Culture specific concepts; (b) The source language concept is not lexicalized in the target language; (c) The source language word is semantically complex; (d) The target language lacks a specific term (hyponym); (e) Differences in form; (f) The use of loan words in the source text.The examples mentioned above, according to the writer, highlight the fact that there is nonequivalence among languages and translators have to deal with this problem. First of all the translator has to assess the significance and implications of non-equivalence in a given context, because not every instance of non-equivalence is significant. The translator must not reproduce every aspect of menaing for every word in a source text. The writer also stressed that it is desirable to convey the meaning of key words which are focal to the understanding and development of the text. Further, he explained that the translator should not distract the reader by looking at every word in isolation and attempting to present her/him with a full linguistic account of its meaning. Professional translators use some strategies for dealing with various types of non-equivalence, such as translation by a more general or neutral word, by cultural substitution, or translation using a loan word, or translation by paraphrase using a related word, or by omission and by illustration. There are very many strategies for dealing with nonequivalence at word level. It is the translator who must decide which strategy to use in order to render the proper and suitable meaning of nonequivalence in the target language.(4) Degree of Equivalence in Translation (Petroniene and Zvirblyte, 2012). The main problem to be discussed in this journal is to focus on the equivalence in translation of headlines of on-line news articles, since headlines are considered as crucial and the most important part of news articles. The objectives of the research are to overview and characterize the main features as well as specifics of translation of media language and headlines in particular, to present the concept of equivalence with the focus on equivalence degrees and to identify equivalence degree in the translated headlines (from English to Lithuanian) and the problems of translation equivalence. The methods to be used are comparative and descriptive analysis and the theory of the degrees of equivalence by Bayar (2007) are applied in their research . As the finding, in translation from English to Lithuanian, there is a tendency to simplify headlines : quite often some information is omitted, complicated words are not translated, modifications in style and structure of headlines are performed and/or completely different wording is used. The contribution for the thesis is to gain some information in line with the concept of equivalence as equivalence is one of the most significant dimensions in the translation studies and the theory of degrees of equivalence has been applied to analyze the problems.

(5) Feasibility of Applying Functional Equivalence Theory to Chinese Translation of English songs (Liyan, 2015) . The main problem which has been shown in this journal is to testify to the feasibility of the functional equivalence in Chinese translation of English song. In conducting the research, the theory of Nida about the functional equivalence is applied because Nida emphasizes the closest natural equivalent and the readers response. Fan (2002) emphasizes that the song translators need to put the elements of music in the very first place in the process of translating foreign songs. Every form of art has a soul and it is important for song translators to concentrate on the combination between the original words and the translated words. Song is an integration of melody and song lyrics. The Chinese translation of English songs encounters a number of difficulties, so it is impossible for English song translators to create a translated version completely equivalent to the originals both in the form and content. Nida (1993) states that translation means translating the meaning, and he also points out that equivalence can not be understood in its mathematical meaning of identity, but only in terms of proximity, i.e. on the basis of degrees of closeness to function identity. In conducting the thesis, it can be learned more about equivalence in the way of how the Chinese translation of English song is analyzed in line with Nidas perspective, whereas this thesis which is in line with the concept of equivalence but the main problem analyzes about the non equivalence at word level based on Bakers theory.

(6) Finding equivalence in medical texts : A Contrastive Study (Azar and Dehkordy,2011). The main problem of the research in this journal is to show findings of equivalences in scientific and medical texts and also comparing the equivalence between two languages, English compared with Persian. The researchers want to consider the translation of medical papers by applying the theory of three scholars such as Halverson (1997) and Baker (1992) and Jacobson (1959) to solve the research problems. The data area a book of some translated medical papers about anesthesia, published 2008. The researchers try to show that sometimes these sentences were not translated completely and sometimes the translators did not transfer the concept of the original text. The contribution of this journal for this thesis is to find better equivalences that affect the quality of translation by performing comparative and contrastive analysis from English texts and their translations. The finding of this research is that it is impossible using some technical words in translation because these words have not exact meaning in target language and the translator have to bring the words itself in translation.

(7) Equivalence Effect Analysis and Situational Meaning in English Translation (Balaqa and Zahra:2012). The topic of this research relates to translation equivalence and this journal gives contribution in line with the topic. According to Balaqa and Zahra (2012), in translation not only do need, like any other texts, to be rendered at maximum accuracy of faithfulness to the original book and at the same time considering as much as possible or their linguistic features, but they equivalent effect created by the translator its of paramount importance as well.

(8) Equivalence and Appropriateness : Divergence Characteristic of Categorize under Translation (Kobenko and Ptashkin ,2014). This journal as given contribution for this research because it gives more explanation about equivalence and non equivalence. According to Kobenko and Ptahkin (2014), equivalence is considered as the quantitative correspondence of source text to target text. Equivalence translation is seen in the sense of quantitative correspondence observed text and target text and their means of expression. They conclude that the quantitative comparison observed text and target text proves the fact of prior non equivalence.

(9) Equivalence in Translation Theories : A Critical Evolution (Despoina,2013). This journal is given a contribution to the topic of this research because Despoina (2013) discusses about equivalence in translation theories. Her paper provides a critical evolution of the most influential equivalence theories that have been proposed by scholars in the field, such as Nida and Taber (1969) distinguish between formal and dynamic equivalent. Newmark (1981) distinguishes between semantic and communicative translations, Catford (1965) distinguishes between formal correspondence and textual equivalence, House (1997) distinguishes between overt and covert translation and Pym (2010) distinguishes between natural and directional equivalence.

(10) Equivalence vs non equivalence in Economic Translation (Chifane ,2012). She has conducted a research about Equivalence versus non equivalence in economic translation. The paper highlights the fact that equivalence represent a concept worth revising and detailing upon when tackling the translation process of economic text both from English into Romanian and from Romanian into English. And her analysis will focus upon the problems arising from the lack of equivalence at the world level.

2.5 Conceptual Framework

The most important thing in transmitting the messages from the source language to the target language is achieving equivalence in translation. It is said that if a linguistic unit in one languge has the same intended meaning or message encoded in another language, then thess two units are considered to be equivalent.

The term equivalence is quite controversial in the translation studies, Its definition, relevance, and applicability within the field of translation theory have caused heated controversy and many different analyzes of the concept of equivalence. Till today equivalence has been studied in relation with the translation process by using different approaches, as results have been provided ideas for further studies on this topic. Despite the fact that this notion is quite debatable, because of the evident discrepancies in the views of various theorists, however, this term continuously is being used as most suitable in the most literature.

The theory of equivalence as interpreted by some of the most innovative theorists in this field such as Vinay and Darbelnet, Jakobson, Nida and Taber, Catford, House and finally Baker have studied equivalence in relation to the translation process, using different approaches, and have provided fruitful ideas for further study on this topic. As the points of view Vinay and Darbelnet said that the equivalence as a procedure which replicates the same situation as in the original, whilst using completely different wording. If this procedure is applied during the translation process, it can maintain the stylistic impact of the source language text in the target language text. Therefore, the need for creating equivalences arises from the situation, and it is in the situation of the source language text that translators have to look for a solution. In the other hand, Jakobson has give his impetus to the theoretical analysis of translation since he introduced the notion of equivalence in difference. According to his theory, translation involves two equivalent messages in two different codes. Whenever there is deficiency, terminology may be qualified and amplified by loanwords or loan translation, semantic shifts. In other words, where there is no literal equivalent for a particular source text word or sentence, then it is up to the translator to choose the most suitable way to render it in the target text.

There are two different types of equivalence, namely formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence as stated by Nida and Taber. The use of formal equivalence might at times have serious implications in the target text since the translation will not be easily understood by the target audience. Whereas, 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. The other approach to equivalence comes from Catford who differs from that adopted by Nida since Catford had a preference for a more linguistic-based approach to translation and this approach is based on the linguistic work of Firth and Halliday.

In this study, the theory in line with the topic of this thesis uses Bakers theory. Baker (1992) is an extremely interesting discussion of the notion of equivalence who offers a more detailed list of conditions upon which the concept of equivalence can be defined. She explores the notion of equivalence at different levels, in relation to the translation process, including all different aspects of translation and hence putting together the linguistic and the communicative approach. She said the equivalence can appear at word level and above word level, when translating from one language into another. Baker acknowledges that, in a bottom-up approach to translation, equivalence at word level is the first element to be taken into consideration by the translator. In fact, when the translator starts analyzing the source text, s/he looks at the words as single units in order to find a direct equivalent term in the target language. She gives a definition of the term word since it should be remembered that a single word can sometimes be assigned different meanings in different languages and might be regarded as being a more complex unit or morpheme. This means that the translator should pay attention to a number of factors when considering a single word, such as number, gender and tense.

The other one in line with equivalence is grammatical equivalence which refers to the diversity of grammatical categories across languages. Baker notes the grammatical rules may vary across languages and this may pose some problems in terms of finding a direct correspondence in the target language. In fact, she claims that different grammatical structures in the source language and the target language may cause remarkable changes in the way the information or message is carried across. These changes may induce the translator either to add or to omit information in the target text because of the lack of particular grammatical devices in the target language itself. Amongst these grammatical devices which might cause problems in translation, Baker focuses on number, tense and aspects, voice, person and gender.

Textual equivalence is another notion of equivalence which refers to the equivalence between a source language text and a target language text in terms of information and cohesion. Texture is a very important feature in translation since it provides useful guidelines for the comprehension and analysis of the source text. It is up to the translator to decide whether or not to maintain the cohesive ties as well as the coherence of the source language text. The decision will be guided by target audience, the purpose of the translation and the text type.

The last criteria in line with the notion of equivalence is pragmatic equivalence which refers to implicatures and strategies of avoidance during the translation process. Implicature is not about what is explicitly said but what is implied. Therefore, the translator needs to work out implied meanings in translation in order to get the source text message across. The role of the translator is to recreate the authors intention in another culture that enables the reader to understand it clearly.

In doing the conceptual framework for this thesis, the theory of Baker will be related to the translation studies and the concept of equivalence. To analyze the translation materials in the Discovery of North Sumatera Guidebook which is focused on the source language (English) and target language (Indonesian), this study is based on Bakers theory and her research to find that there are eleventh common problems of non equivalence at word level in translating the source language to target language.

They are culture specific concepts, the source language concept is not lexicalized in the target language, the source language word is semantically complex, the source and the target languages make different distinctions in meaning, the target language lacks a superordinate, the target language lacks a specific term (hyponym), differences in physical or interpersonal perspective, differences in expressive meaning, differences in form, differences in frequency and purpose of using specific forms and the use of loan words in the source text.

Based on the eleventh common problems of non equivalence at word level, the researcher will analyze the translation materials from English to Indonesian which are found in the Discovery of North Sumatera Guidebook. She will separate the translated texts and find out whether the whole of the eleventh problems of non equivalence are used or not.

The figure of the conceptual framework for this study will be shown as in the following :

Figure 2.7 Conceptual Framework

Translation Studies

Theory of Equivalence by Mona Baker (1992)

Pragmatic equivalence

Textual equivalence

Grammatical equivalence

Equivalence at word level

Equivalence above word level

Culture specific concepts

The source language concept is not lexicalized in the target language

The source language word is semantically complex

The source and the target languages make different distinctions in meaning

The target language lacks a superordinate

The target language lacks a specific term (hyponym)

Differences in physical or interpersonal perspective

Differences in expressive meaning

Differences in form

Differences in frequency and purpose of using specific forms

The use of loan words in the source text.

Common Problems of Non Equivalence at word level

The translation materials in the Discovery of North Sumatera Guidebook 2011

Source language (English) and Target language (Indonesian)

7

PAGE