Indonesian address systems (“Pretty Woman” and “Ada Apa Dengan Cinta”
movie manuscript). It is explained that address systems are words that people
use.
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW, CONCEPT, AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 2.1. Literature Review By exploring the library (in the Faculty of letters, S2 and S3 programs) and internet (google and Journal of Translation), a contrastive study, in this case an analysis utilizing strategies of translation proposed by Baker (1992) and types of translation based on Floor (2007) has never been conducted before. Therefore, the literature to be reviewed in this thesis includes a book about diction, an article and some thesis inspiring this study. There are some specific reasons to decide the researches to be reviewed in this thesis: first, these researches which are considered up to date ranging from 2002 to 2010. Second, they are related to the subject or the topic of this study: word, translation, contrastive and comparative study. Third, they have different topics that are rarely conducted in the study of translation. Finally, these researches give some different perspectives in the study of translation, that is, the study is not only conducted based on linguistic competence but also on other aspects. First, Gorys Keraf (2002) compiled a book entitled “Diksi dan Gaya Bahasa (Diction and Style)”. This book is concerned with composition of words in rhetoric. Composition is the arrangement or placement of certain units into a harmonious combination. And, a composition using language is intended to cover two points, namely, aesthetic unity and aesthetic harmony, and intellectual unity and intellectual harmony. The earlier concerns about the technical factors of
11
12
writing such as orderliness in typing, good spelling, etc. and the intellectual one which covers the theme of writing, the framework, data collection and data analysis, the method, interpretation and argumentation, description, and good knowledge about narration. This harmonious composition in writing is determined by good diction. However, this book is not concerned with word choice in translation, but it can be used as the general point of view and relevant to explain about how choice of words is made. Second, Dewi (2008) did a contrastive study between English and Indonesian address systems (“Pretty Woman” and “Ada Apa Dengan Cinta” movie manuscript). It is explained that address systems are words that people use to designate the person they are talking to. Its use depends on the relationship between the addresser and addressee as well as the relative status of the individual involved in conversation. This research was intended to compare English and address systems to Indonesian address one especially on the categories and politeness pattern. The research was a descriptive qualitative research. The data sources were “Pretty Woman” and “Ada Apa Dengan Cinta” Movie Manuscripts. The data were taken through observation method which involved watching the movie, reading the manuscript, selecting the address system, noting and making checklist. In analyzing the data, the writer used Tu and Vous principles, utterance classification, and politeness application. In addition, the types of address system refer to the classification of address systems proposed by Wardaugh. The result of the study shows the similarities and differences between English and Indonesian address systems. Based on the categories, both English and Indonesian address
13
systems are similar in a) addressing of respectful term, b) addressing using name, c) addressing of kinship term. However, in addressing using intimate terms there is a difference; English uses them not only to address people who have intimate relationship but also to address other people even sometimes in the first meeting. In Indonesian, addressing using intimate terms are used only to address people who have intimate relationship. Based on the politeness pattern, the similarities between English and Indonesian address system are, a) not using commisive utterances and, b) using bald on record application. Moreover, the differences between English and Indonesian address systems are on: a) the type of politeness application, b) the component face, c) the T-V principles, and d) the classification of utterance. It is very interesting to contrast two movie manuscripts in different languages regarding the address systems. However, it has to be remembered that these two manuscripts are totally different from each other; first, regarding the languages; English and Indonesian are different languages starting from the form and structure. Then, the movies contrasted are also different regarding the theme; “Pretty Woman” is an adult movie about finding a perfect person (a woman), and “Ada Apa Dengan Cinta” is a teenage story about someone whose name is Cinta who seeks for love, finds it, then lose it for the biggest purpose, namely future. Aside from the movies chosen as the subject are relevant to be contrasted or not, but the presentation of the study is reasonable research to consider in order to have the first guide to compile a contrastive study.
14
Then, Aghili (2010) did a comparative study of Molavi’s “The Song of the Reed” (poetry in Arabic) and its translation was published recently in internet. The analysis of source and target texts was done both at textual and extra textual levels. Regarding the analysis at textual level, different aspects of form such as, music, rhyme, and trope are examined. With reference to the form, the translated piece is a prose translation of the original devoid of the literary devices mostly used in the original. Concerning the music of the text, the translator’s inability to create the images and alliterations is obvious. Regarding the figures of speech, personification is well-preserved in the translated text but metaphors and puns are literally translated causing the target text devoid of these literary devices. Regarding the analysis at extra-textual level, since the translator resorted to literal translation for most of the culture bound terms in the poem such as Majnoon, he could not transfer the image as effective as the image of the original poem. If the translator had made use of footnotes for some of the culture bound terms, then target readers would have had some background knowledge about them and accordingly the aesthetic values of the translation would have been much more. So, it should be taken into account that whenever the translator does not consider the crucial factors in a poem, it leads to a translation which is less poetic and in which the style of the poet is not only ignored but distorted. This research gives a contribution to the comparative study of translation relevant to have a first view about comparative study as constrastive study is the sub-division of it. A comparative study is done to find out the differences or the similarities of the two or more subjects. But, this research is done to compare the
15
SL and TL regarding the form of the expression. Translation is transferring meaning of the SL into the TL; therefore, there will be loss and gain, either in the level of the form or the meaning, in the transfer. Therefore, the SL and the TL must be different in many things except hopefully the meaning because the languages used are different from each other; there must be a shift and because translation is translation, and the translator is free to choose the strategies either the extent of formal equivalence respecting the SL or dynamic equivalence respecting the TL. The following study is relevant as it identifies and investigates the objects of the study as metaphorical expression, lexical equivalence, and domestication and foreignization: Subiyanto (2006) did a research on the metaphorical expression in “Song of Salomon” comparing the King James’s version to Today’s English version. He started from the assumption that metaphors are mostly considered having many problems in translation because the meaning intended to transfer into the target language is far from their literal meaning. The translator needs to analyse the components of metaphor and to consider the context in order to grasp the meaning. The study is intended to identify some metaphorical expressions, to explore problems in translating metaphor, and to find out the strategies adopted by the translators to cope with such problems. This is a qualitative research. The results of the study are: (1) the identification of metaphorical expressions is carried out using three components of metaphor, namely, object, image, and sense; then the identifications are classified into metaphor, simile, metonymy, synecdoche, personification, hyperbole, and idiom; (2) there are some problems in
16
translating so that the readers meet hindrances when obtaining the message; (3) the strategies use figurative comparative device “as….as”, translating non figuratively, changing the image, and adopting the modulation procedure of translation. Based on Kaelan (2005:284), a comparative analysis is a method that emphazises on how to describe and explain the characteristics of two or more works. Moreover, Sudaryanto (1988:63) proposes that it is a method that suggests comparing two data in order to find out their similarities and differences. However, the study conducted by Subiyanto (2006) did not show such characteristics of comparative study mentioned above but more focused on the way metaphorical expressions are translated. However, this study gave a relevant contribution how to cope with the first problem of this study, expecially how the identification is made. Fifth, Setianingsih (2003) did a research on some alternative ways of establishing lexical equivalences of Balinese cultural terms in English found in a bilingual book entitled ‘Pesta Kesenian Bali’ translated by Vern Cork into ‘Bali Art Festivals’. She proposed that the general purpose of translation is to convey the original message in the receptor language. There are problems confronted during the process: problem related to lexical meaning, grammatical structure, contextual meaning, and socio-cultural meaning. She focuses her study on the Balinese cultural terms categorized in cultural aspects indicating belief, art, and custom. She found that the translator frequently uses loan words; the way of
17
establishing lexical equivalent by using loan words modified with a description is most frequently used. Therefore, she concluded that modifying the loan words from Balinese with a classifier or with a description of form, or both form and function could also maintain the SL message or meaning, even though, loss/gain/skewing of information may sometimes still occur in the transfer. Using the English generic word modified with a description phrase of feature form, the statement of function or both form and function may result in the more equivalent translation than using other ways. However, less translation equivalence could be accomplished by modifying generic word with a comparison. And the use of a cultural substitute could just maintain less meaning since it frequently results in skewing of the SL’s information, even though, this may give benefit to the receptor language readers to understand the unknown concepts of the SL cultural terms. This study gives a contribution and explanation on how the lexical equivalence is established. It is also considered a relevant study in order to solve the first problem as it is closely related to word and word choice. Finally, Jayantini (2010) recently finished a thesis entitled “Domestication and Foreignization Taking Place in Technical Translation of The Bilingual Glossary of Biosecurity”. This study aims at investigating the translation of technical terminology from English into Indonesian. The analysis of this research is focused on the procedures of translation, domestication and foreignization and translation phenomena taking place in technical translation of the Bilingual Glosary of Biosecurity. It is found that five procedures of translation are applied
18
by the translator. The five adopted procedures are borrowing, calque, literal translation, transposition and adaptation. Of 482 technical terms, 16 terms (3,31%) are translated through borrowing procedure, 190 terms (39,42%) through calque, 216 terms (44,81) through literal translation, 13 terms (2,70%) through transposition and 47 terms (9,75%) through adaptation. With regard to the characteristics of domestication and foreignization and translation phenomena, it is also revealed that the meeting point of domestication and foreignization lies on the element of adaptation. Domestication in technical translation possibly takes place by means of adaptation procedure while foreignization occurs through the process of spelling adaptation when the English terms are adopted and absorbed into the Indonesian language. In the case of technical translation, either adaptation of concept or adaptation of spelling can increase the number of terms in the inventory of Indonesian terms despite the different flavour they share. It is really a good research to start comprehending the notion of domestication and foreignization. Then, this study also utilizes procedures of translation which as the same essence with strategy of translation. Therefore it is also relevant to the first problem of this study. Aside from this study gives alot contribution to the fortcoming of this study, it is important to notice that the study of translation is not restricted on the area the translation of the words in isolation as in a glosary, but the translation of the words in composition as in a text. Therefore, the application of the procedures of translation proposed by Vinay and Dalbernet (in Venuti, 2000) in a text, particularly in translations, moreover, in two
19
different versions of translation of one source text is very interesting and challenging to study in order to have a holistic understanding.
2.2. Concept 2.2.1. Contrastive Study Generally, based on Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies (2011), contrastive study is the study of two languages in contrast. It has been referred to by a variety of names, not all of which mean the same to all writers. One can find the following terms used: contrastive studies, contrastive language studies, contrastive linguistics, applied contrastive studies, contrastive description and others. It is mostly applied in language teaching. However, Gast (2011) proposes that contrastive analysis can be regarded as a branch of comparative study that is concerned with pairs of languages which are ‘socio-culturally linked’. It is also sometimes used for comparing small groups (rather than just pairs) of languages, and does not require a socio-cultural link between the languages investigated (Gast, 2011). In its development, this kind of method is applied to identify differences between them in general or in selected areas (Roultledge, 2011). Contrustive study has developed widely as a modern method to analyse two languages in bilingual society. Moreover, in translation studies, this method is used to analyse the differences as well as the similarities between the source language and the target language. In addition, based on Gadysa and Gelbina (2011), contrastive analysis is useful in discovering language universals, studying
20
problems in translation and studying language types. However, furthermore, they state that it is more concerned with dissimilarities than similarities. In the same opinion, Volker Gast (2011) states contrustive studies focusing on differences, rather than similarities between the languages compared.
2.2.2. Non-equivalence Word The problem of non-equivalence is proposed by Baker (1992: 20) to mean that the target language has no direct equivalent for a word which occurs in the source text. The type and level of difficulty posed can vary tremendously depending on the nature of non-equivalence. Different kinds of non-equivalence require different strategies, some are very straightforward, others are more involved and difficult to handle. There are several kinds of words regarded as non-equivalence such as culture-specific concept, the source language concept is not lexicalized in the target language, the source language word is semantically complex, and so forth (Baker, 1992: 21-26). Therefore, to deal with this problem, strategies of translation are needed to be utilized. The understanding of the strategies of translation is based on the notion of equivalence at word level proposed by Baker (1992): (a) Translation by a more general word (superordinate), (b) translation by a more neutral/less expressive word, (c) translation by cultural substitution, (d) translation using a loan word or loan word plus explanation, (e) translation by paraphrase using a related word, (f) translation by paraphrase using unrelated words, (g) translation by omission, and (h)
21
translation by illustration. These strategies are used to deal with the nonequivalence words, namely, culture-specific concepts.
2.2.3. Translation and Its Type Etymologically, “translation is a “carrying across” or “bringing across”: the Latin translatio derives from transferre (trans, “across” + ferre, “to carry” or “to bring”)” (Translation, 2005 in Ordudary, 2008). Translating consists of reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the sourcelanguage message; first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style (Nida and Taber, 1974). They further elaborate that, the translation should aim at reproducing the message instead of the similarity between the source language and target language messages. A good translation, in their opinion, is a translation which does not look like a translation. Many theorists have categorized the types of translation in two opposite styles, e.g. Nida and Taber (1974) categorize it into formal correspondent versus dynamic
equivalent,
Newmark
(1988)
categorizes
into
semantic
and
communicative, while Larson (1984) into form-based translation and meaningbased translation. However, these two-fold distinctions, that in other words can be called between literal and idiomatic translation is not really adequate types since it is still too general. In order to have the more appropriate and specific types of translation, therefore, the notion of types of translation proposed by Sebastian J. Floor (2007) in Journal of Translation is necessary to be concerned. There are four types of translation (Floor, 2007:12): (1) Close resemblant translation, (2)
22
open resemblant translation, (3) close interpretative translation, and (4) open interpretative translation. Here is the specification: 2.1. The specification of translation types
Close resemblant
Open resemblant
Close Open interpretative interpretative
Resemblance orientation to the original semantic content
Full content resemblance; code level resemblance
Mostly content resemblance, occasional interpretative resemblance; explicature-level resemblance
Some content resemblance, more but still limited interpretative resemblance; limited interpretationlevel resemblance
Extensive interpretative resemblance; significant interpretationlevel resemblance
Degree of explication & adjustment of the original syntactic, semantic and pragmatic form
None, or strictly those required by the receptor language grammar to make sense
Minimal explication, some adjustments
Maximal explication, considerable, even optimal, adjustments
Maximal explication, optimal adjustment, some implicatures made explicit (assumptions and conclusions)
2.2.4. Yogasùtra and Yoga The word Yogasùtra can be divided into two words (in Sanskrit) Yoga and Sùtra. The word Yoga refers to restraint. According to Pott (1966:1), in general, it can be translated into connexion or union, that is, the union of the individual soul with the cosmic soul or the Supreme Principle. It derives from the root yuj- that means to connect or join. Then, Yoga in this case is described as the spiritual effort which is intended, through physical and spiritual mortification, to arrive at higher states of consciousness, the ultimate end of which is the union of one’s own self with the prime source of all things. Yoga also means the method or
23
physical and mental exercise system which is performed to maintain and improve physical and spiritual health (Bagus, 2002: 1185). While, Sùtra, according to Webster’s, is a precept or maxim. Thus, Yogasùtra means the maxim of Yoga to get physical and spiritual health to arrive at higher states of consciousness. This sacred text is written by a yogi whose name is Patanjali in about 1st up to 5th centuries (Bagus, 2002: 1185). To understand Hinduism, there are three important aspects: Rasa, Samkya, and Yoga. The earliest aspect is related to the aesthetic experience. It is the sense felt by human being while experiencing something (see Yasa, 2006). The later is related to the philosophy of metaphysic that deals with the understanding of the universe and its content and how it is created. This universe is created of two elements; they are immaterial and material element and there is a causal connection in it (see Sura, 2009). And, in order to get free from the causal connection or in Hindu terminology called Moksa, there is only one way to realize that is called Yoga. The teaching of Yoga can also be found in several OldJavanese texts (see Sura, 2009). Yogasùtra written by Patanjali, then, is translated into many languages and one of them is English, then between those of many English translations, two of them are very interesting to be contrasted: Swami Prabhavananda version (1953) and Swami Vivekananda version (1976).
2.3. Theoretical Framework A theory is an explanation of a phenomenon, the perception of system and order in something observed (Bell, 1991:24-25). This section covers the
24
theoretical foundation, which supports the research. To be specific, it supplies the theoretical bases of the data analysis of the two principle problems that emerge in this study: the first is the strategies of translation of each translator to make a good choice of words in translating Sanskrit terms or culture-specific concepts. For this concern, the strategies of translation proposed by Baker (1992) are suitable to apply. Then, to investigate the types of translation of each translation, types of translation proposed by Floor (2007) are the most reasonable to be applied as it is the newest one. First, the model of translation process proposed by Bell (1991) is considered the most appropriate one to be the frame of thinking for the translator in translating as well as in understanding the process passed through by the translator when translating. Then, as Gorlee (1994) states that translation is a semiotic process of decision-making, the theory of semiotics is also important to consider. And, as this study’s phenomenon is diction, the theory about diction and its category must be useful to be a reference.
2.3.1. Translation Process Translation process is related to something that happens during translating. Bell (1991:45-60) divides the process into analysis and synthesis and, within them, there are three distinguishable areas of operation: (1) syntactic; (2) semantic; and (3) pragmatic. Based on Bell (1991) in the process of analysis, the first one is the process of syntactic analysis. At this stage there are two stores that relieve the short term memory, i.e. frequent structure store (FSS) and frequent lexis store (FLS). Then, the semantic analysis is passed that has a task of concept
25
recovery before processed in pragmatic analysis that has two tasks, namely, to isolate the thematic structure and to provide a register analysis. Later, the idea passes the semantic representation that deals with a set of abstract, universal concepts and relationship, which represent the whole thought expressed in the clause (Bell, 1991: 56). These three levels of analysis, then, which is absorbed by the planner in which in this point the decisions are made whether to translate the semantic representation or not and return to the beginning to start work on the next clause. According to Bell (1991: 59-60) after the SLT clause has been converted into a semantic representation and the reader or the translator has decided on the option of translating, the process moves on to pragmatic synthesis that receives all information available on the semantic representation. Then, in semantic synthesis area, the TL semantic processor receives indication of the purpose and works to create structures to carry the prositional content and produce a satisfactory proposition. Finally, in the syntactic synthesis with its syntactic processor accepts the input from the semantic stage, scans its FLS for suitable lexical items, and checks in the FSS for an appropriate clause-type that represents the proposition (Bell, 1991: 60). The following figure (2.1) could explain the process in visible manner:
26
Figure 2.1. The model of translation process by Bell (1991: 59)
2.3.2. Translation as a Semiotic Process of Decision-Making According to Segers (1978: 14), semiotics is a discipline which investigates all forms of communication insofar as this takes place by means of
27
signs and based upon system (codes). Meanwhile, language is a means of communication; moreover, translation is a kind of communication using language. Translation is and may be logically assimilated to semiosis, or sign activity (Pierce, in Gorlee, 1994:10). The sign is produced through signification process, which is the process of combining something used as a sign and indication (Barthes; in Young, 1981: 37). Sign is anything that implies something other. The relation between signs themselves is syntactic; the relation between signs and their denotata is semantic; the relation between signs and sign users is pragmatic (Gorlee, 1994:13). Gorlee (1994:11) states that semiotics studies the production, transmission, exchange, and interpretation of messages consisting in one or more signs. Moreover, Van Soest (1992:5) states that, as a discipline, semiotics studies the sign system and any other things related to the signs: how they work, its relation to other signs, how they are encoded, and how they are decoded by those who use them based on certain codes. The code achieves a connection between the signifier and the signified. Text analysis as well as translation is inseparable from semiotics, because Petofi (1983; see Gorlee, 1994:21) defined translation as the applied branch of “verbal semiotics”; the latter is characterized, rather non-specifically as theory of linguistic communication with four dimensions: co-text, context, text, and a system of beliefs/knowledge. Translation must be approached semiotically because translating implies a semiotic process of decision-making (Gorlee, 1994:21). The interpretation the translator makes is the basis for his further task –
28
translating –, and the interpretation is achieved through reading and based on the belief/knowledge he has. In reading text, Riffaterre (1978:5) proposes a process of reading used in semiotics: (1) The first process is heuristic reading that is emphasized on the reader linguistic competence, which includes an assumption of language referential – and at this stage, words do indeed seem to relate first of all to things (or meanings). (2) Hermeneutic is a process through the text, in which the reader remembers what he has just read and modifies his understanding of it in the light of what he is now decoding. For example, if someone says or writes: I bought some vegetables and chicken this morning (researcher’s example) It can be seen that the structure is S P O A. This will make a mental picture in the hearer’s mind about what the speaker did in the morning semantically, and pragmatically it could mean ‘let’s cook, I will cook something’ or ‘come to my place, I have some food made of vegetables and chicken, get lunch with me, etc.’ based on the context. And, semiotically, this sentence (signifier) signifies something (signified) about the speaker. By the choice of word, first, it can be assumed that ‘the speaker or the writer was definitely in a place (market)’ and perhaps, ‘a person who wakes up in the morning, likes to cook and s/he would like to cook or at least someone who likes to eat vegetables and chicken, etc’. Then, the simple past ‘bought’ and its relation to adjunct ‘this morning’ indicates that the speaker says the utterance after the morning, on the same day as the conversation is made, etc., and the speaker did not do something other than buying vegetables and chicken in the morning. Therefore, these
29
interpretations will be the frame for the translator to do his next task after reading the sentence. The possible translations into Indonesian are as follows: − Saya membeli beberapa sayur dan ayam pagi ini. − Aku membeli sayuran dan daging ayam pagi ini di pasar. − Aku ke pasar pagi-pagi beli sayur dan daging ayam. − Aku punya sayuran dan ayam, ayo kita masak! − Saya mau masak sayuran dan ayam. − Mari makan di rumahku, aku punya sayuran dan ayam! − Aku bangun pagi-pagi lalu pergi membeli sayuran dan ayam. − Saya tidak melakukan sesuatu selain membeli sayuran dan daging ayam pagi ini. And so forth (researcher’s example) These possible translations are choices for the translator as the decision-maker. Unlike the original writer, the translator is the special sort of writer who creates the text not from his/her own ideational, but from other’s ideas and texts. Consequently, the translator behaves very much like an editor or writer who decides to re-write what he has read by considering the vocabulary, structure, and meaning of the text, and his/her past experience as reader.
2.3.3. Diction and Its Category The term diction signifies the selection of words (Abrams, 1971:131). Diction, in its original, primary meaning, refers to the writer's or the speaker's distinctive vocabulary choices and style of expression (wikipedia). Meanwhile, Keraf (2002:22) states that it covers wider sense than something represented by the combination of words:
30
a. Diction is a matter of appropriateness in using words to express an idea, how to categorize the words, and considering the appropriate expression in particular situation. b. Diction is an ability to distinguish correctly the meaning of words and the appropriate forms to fit with the situation where they are used. c. A good diction is determined by good vocabulary proficiency. There are four general types of diction: (1) “formal,” used in scholarly or lofty writing; (2) “informal,” used in relaxed but educated conversation (e.g. she went crazy); (3) “colloquial,” used in everyday speech (e.g. “pricey” instead of “expensive”); and (4) “slang,” containing newly coined words and other terms not accepted in formal usage (e.g. mob, banter, sham, etc.) (Glossary, 2010; Daemen, 2010). In addition, to be more specific, Rambo (2001) categorises diction into two: 1. Abstract Diction Abstract diction refers to words that do not appeal imaginatively to the reader’s senses (Rambo, 2001). Abstract words create no “mental picture” or any other imagined sensations for readers. Abstract words include love, hate, feelings, emotions, temptation, peace, seclusion, alienation, politics, rights, freedom, intelligence, attitudes, progress, guilt, etc. Some abstract diction will probably be inevitable in the papers, but they are needed to give readers something that they can imaginatively see, hear, feel, smell, or taste. If it remains on an abstract level, the readers will most likely lose interest. For example:
31
“Ralph and Jane have experienced difficulties in their lives and both have developed bad attitudes because of these difficulties. They have now set goals to surmount these problems, although the unfortunate consequences of their experiences are still apparent in many everyday situations.” (Rambo, 2001) What is this writer trying to say? It is hard to tell because the diction is so abstract that it is likely to mean something different from each reader, e.g. the usage of the word ‘difficulties’ that is very absurd and confusing (which difficulties does the writer mean?), and then the phrases ‘bad attitudes’, later, ‘these problems’, etc. Writing that is overly abstract and general is also not pleasant to read. The worlds of ideas and abstractions have their place, but readers need something they can hold on to in essays.
2. Concrete Diction It refers to words that stimulate some kinds of sensory response in the reader: as we read the words, we can imaginatively use our senses to experience what the words represent (Rambo, 2001). Concrete words include dog, cat, computer, classroom, tree, candy, bar, car, chair, department store, radio, pencil, hat, clock, rain, ice cube, beer, etc. Now, try to picture a dog. Because “dog” is a concrete word, which enables the readers to form a mental picture of it. Because concrete diction imaginatively appeals to the senses, it tends to involve the readers more than the abstract diction does. To be clearer, this concrete diction is divided into two:
32
a. General Diction What do the readers imaginatively “see” when reading the following sentence? “The dog jumped on top of the car?” (Rambo, 2001). The concrete diction should stimulate some “mental picture”. But, what exactly do the readers “see”? They should imagine a dog is jumping on top of a car. But, what kind of dog? And what kind of car do they imagine? Most likely, the readers see their dog jumping on top of their car, but is this what the writer intended them to “see”? Probably not. The sentence uses concrete diction, thus allowing the readers to create a mental picture, but that diction is general by the usage of the word ‘dog’ that does not refer to specific meaning ‘which dog?’. It could not create specific mental picture in the reader’s mind though the writer or the speaker has a close social relationship. b. Specific Diction Now, what do the readers imaginatively “see” when they read this sentence: “The Saint Bernard jumped on top of the red corvette?” (Rambo, 2001). The concrete and specific diction in this sentence ensures that the readers are “seeing” exactly what the writer wants them to see. Specific diction will help ensure that the meaning that the writer intends is exactly the meaning that the readers receive. The diction indicates that the speaker or
33
writer and the hearer or the reader have a close social relationship in which the reader or the hearer has known exactly who ‘Saint Bernard’ is and which ‘red corvette’ the speaker refers to. The form and the meaning of the words themselves, however, determine these categories of diction. To determine that a word is either general or specific, there are two terms of sense relation between words to consider, namely, hyponymy and meronymy. Hyponym is the subordinate terms of the lexical items, e.g. the word ‘dog’ and ‘cat’ are hyponym for animal. Whereas, meronymy is the superordinate and sometimes is called hypernymy that gives relative distinctions among them that the word ‘animal’ is the meronymy of ‘dog’ or ‘cat’ (Croft, 2004:167). Moreover, the word ‘dog’ is the superordinate of ‘rottweiler’, ‘husky’, etc.
2.3.4. Lexical Meaning Every word (lexical unit or item) has something that is individual that makes it different from any other word. And it is just the lexical meaning which is the most outstanding individual property of the word (Zgusta, 1971; in Baker, 1992:12). The lexical meaning of a word or lexical unit may be thought of as the specific value it has in a particular linguistic system and the ‘personality’ it acquires through usage within that system (Baker, 1992:12). There are four main types of meaning in words and utterances (utterances being stretches of written or spoken text) based on Cruse (in Baker, 1992:13-17):
34
1. Propositional meaning The 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, under normal circumstances, to refer to a piece of clothing worn on the foot, such as shocks (Baker, 1992:13). 2. Expressive meaning The expressive meaning relates to the speaker’s feelings or attitude rather than to what words and utterances refer to. The difference between Don’t complain and Don’t whinge does not lie in their propositional meaning but in the expressiveness of whinge, that the speaker find the action annoying (Baker, 1992:13). 3. Presupposed meaning The presupposed meaning arises from co-occurrence restrictions, i.e. restrictions on what other words or expressions are expected to see before or after a particular lexical unit. These restrictions are of two types: a) selectional restrictions, these are a function of propositional meaning of a word, for instance, we expect a human subject for the adjective studious and inanimate one for geometrical; b) collocational restrictions, these are semantically arbitrary restrictions which do not follow the propositional
35
meaning of a word, for instance, laws are broken in English, but in Arabic they are ‘contradicted’ (Baker, 1992:14). 4. Evoked meaning The evoked meaning arises from dialect and register variation. The dialect is classified on one of such bases as geographical, e.g. 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.g. verily and really); and social, i.e. words and structures used by members of different social classes (e.g. scent and perfume, napkin and serviette). Meanwhile, the register variations are based on the field, tenor, and mode of discourse (Baker, 1992:15-17).
2.3.5. The Strategies of Translation These strategies are used for dealing with non-equivalence word, in this case those words which are considered to contain culture specific concepts. Baker (1992:26-42) proposes eight strategies: 1. Translation by a more general word (superordinate) This is one of the commonest strategies for dealing with many types of non-equivalence, particularly in the area of propositional meaning. It works equally in most, if not all, languages, since the hierarchical structure of semantic fields is not language-specific (Baker, 1992:26). For example, the translation of a Sanskrit word into English:
36
SL: Sthira sukham àsanam (YS, II: 46; apx 3: 199). TL: Posture is that which is firm and pleasant (SVV, II: 46; apx 2: 192). The Sanskrit word ‘àsana’ is translated into ‘Posture’ in English. The specific concept of àsana is siting position in peculiar posture according to the custom of the devotee. It means that by the meaning of the word, àsana is the subordinate of the word posture. Based on Newmark (1988:114), normally the SL word has a more specific meaning than the TL word. Therefore, componential analysis is considered relevant to have a more comprehensive understanding about the strategy of translation by a more general word. The analysis provided in distribution of the semantic components and followed by gain or loss of information by Puspani (2003: 11-12) as follows: SL: Jalan kecil itu ramailah jika orang desa turun bekerja rodi atau datang berkumpul ke balai desa di kampung Bunut Panggang. TL: Occasionally it was crowded, as when men and women were marshaled by the village to do some collective task, or a throng of people passed along it on their way to an assembly at Bunut Panggang. bekerja rodi
do some collective task
group of people
+
+
doing the work together
+
+
+
- (Puspani, 2003:11)
doing the work because of order by force from the Dutch
The actual meaning of this term is some collective work for the people because of an order by force by the Dutch and for the benefit of the Dutch government (Puspani, 2003:11-12). It means that the context ‘doing the work
37
because of order by force from the Dutch’ is lost or in this manner, the cultural specific concept of the Indonesian could not be totally conveyed by the translation.
2. Translation by a more neutral/less expressive word Expressive meaning relates to the speaker’s feelings or attitude rather than to what words and utterances refer to (Baker, 1992:13). While, neutral word means the word which has no inherent evaluative meaning or connotation. It is applied to avoid conveying the wrong expressive meaning (Baker, 1992:29). For example, English word that is translated into Japanese and back translated: SL: The shamanic practices we have investigated are rightly seen as an archaic mysticism. BT: The shamanic behaviour which we have been researching should rightly be considered as ancient mysticism (Baker, 1992:29). 3. Translation by cultural substitution This strategy involves replacing a cultural-specific item or expression with a target language item which does not have the same propositional meaning but is likely to have similar impact on the target reader (Baker, 1992: 31). The main advantage of using this strategy is that it gives the reader a concept with which s/he can identify something familiar and appealing. For example, an English- Greek translation that is back translated into English: SL: A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave him a public lecture on astronomy.
38
BT: Alice in Wonderland was once giving a lecture about astronomy (Baker 1992:31). The translator decides that this is best achieved by introducing the reader to a character which is familiar and interesting rather than to a foreign character and stereotype with which the reader may not identify.
4. Translation using a loan word or loan word plus explanation Based on Baker (1992: 34), this strategy is particularly common in dealing with culture-specific items, modern concepts, and buzzwords. Following the loan words with an explanation is very useful when the word in question is repeated several times in the text. Once explained, the loan word can then be used on its own; the reader can understand it and is not distracted by further lengthy explanations. For example, Sanskrit – English translation: SL: Bandha kàraóa úaithilyàt pracàra saývedanàc ca cittasya para úarìràveúaá (YS, III: 39; apx 3: 200). TL: When the cause of bondage of the Chitta has become loosened, the Yogi, by his knowledge of its channels of activity (the nerves), enters another’s body (SVV, III: 39; apx 2: 194). The explanation which follows the loan word is based on modifying a superordinate/general word. In relation to loanword, Haugen (in Jayantini, 2010:20) divides it into three: 1) Pure loanwords is defined as the loanword without undergoing the process of morphological and orthographical adaptation,
39
2) mix loanwords stands for the loanwords which experience the adaptation process, and 3) loan blends refers to the combination of a loanword from SL and an original word of TL which construct a unity. This type usually occurs in the level of phrase.
5. Translation by paraphrase using a related word This strategy tends to be used when the concept expressed by the source items is lexicalized in the target language but in a different form, and when the frequency with which a certain form is used in the source text is significantly higher than would be natural in the target language (Baker, 1992: 37). In other words, by using this strategy, the focus of the translation, which is in paraphrase form, is directly to the semantic meaning of the word without any influence from the contextual meaning and interpretative meaning. For example, Sanskrit – English translation: SL: Sopakramaý nirùpakramaý ca karma tat saýyamàd aparànta jñànam ariûþebhyo và (YS, III: 23; apx 3: 200) TL: By making samyama on two kinds of karma – that which will soon bear fruit and that which will not bear fruit until later – or by recognizing the portents of death, a yogi may know the exact time of his separation from the body (SPV, III: 23; apx 1: 184). The specific concept of the word ‘ariûþa’ is sign or symptom of approaching death that then translated in the paraphrase form ‘the portents of death’. It means that the focus of the translation is directly to the semantic meaning of the Sanskrit word.
40
6. Translation by paraphrase using unrelated words If the concept expressed by source item is not lexicalized at all in the target language, the paraphrase strategy can still be used in some contexts. Instead of a related word, the paraphrase may be based on modifying a superordinate or simply on unpacking the meaning of the source item, particularly if the item in question is semantically complex (Baker, 1992: 39). For example, Sanskrit – English translation of Yogasùtra: SL: Kùrmanàðyam sthairyam (YS, III: 32; apx 3: 185). TL: By making samyama on the tube within the chest, one acquires absolute motionlessness (SPV, III: 32; apx 1: 185). The translation of the word ‘kùrma’ into ‘within the chest’ is not based on its specific concept but restricted by the word tube before it. It is because the Sanskrit word means tortoise in which it is explained further by Karambelkar (: 429-430) that the fact in physiology, the stability of the body is regulated by the cochlea in the inner ear. It means that there are different understandings of its specific concept.
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 to the development of the text to justify distracting the reader with lengthy explanations, translators can and often do simply omit translating the word or expression in question (Baker, 1992: 40). For example, Sanskrit – English translation as follows:
41
SL: Tasmin sati úwàsa praúwàsayor gatiwicchedaá prànàyàmaá (YS, II: 49; apx 3: 199). TL: Controlling the motion of the exhalation and the inhalation follows after this (SVV, II: 49; apx 2: 192). It is advisable to use this strategy only as a last resort, when the advantages of producing a smooth, readable translation clearly outweigh the value of rendering a particular meaning in a given context.
8. Translation by illustration This strategy is a useful option if the word which lacks an equivalent in the target language refers to a physical entity which can be illustrated, particularly if there are restrictions on space and if the text has remain short, concise and to the point (Baker, 1992: 41).
2.3.6. Types of Translation The two dimensions of translation types are not adequate anymore, especially for sacred text as Yogasùtra. Therefore, the most contemporary and applicable is the four types of translation by Sebastian J. Floor (2007) applied to “bible” translation. There are two main criteria to distinguish the translation types proposed by Floor (2007:4). The first is the degree of semantic resemblance to the original. The continuum here moves from close and direct semantic resemblance on the one extreme, to indirect resemblance with an interpretative quality in the translation (following Gutt’s (2000) distinctions). The second main criterion is the extent of adjustments made vis-à-vis the original forms. This criterion is more
42
applicable in comparing translation products. There are eight criteria to help distinguish more clearly between the various degrees of explicitness (Floor, 2007:8-13): (1) order of clauses and phrases; (2) sentence length; (3) reference disambiguation and tracking; (4) concordance of lexical items; (5) key terms and unknown terms; (6) figurative usage and idioms; (7) transition marking; and (8) information structure. However, as this comparative study is focused on the diction or lexical choice, only two of them are applied: 1) Key terms (and unknown terms) This criterion is related to the concordance of lexical items criterion, with the focus not only on concepts that are the key terms of the themes in Scripture, but also on concepts that are either unknown in the receptor language culture, or the concepts that are more or less known, but difficult to define and apply. It is about the historicity of the key terms: from being maintained; to being minimally adjusted for clearer communication; to being maximally adjusted (for clearer communication); to being generally not maintained (Floor, 2007:10-17). 2) Concordance of lexical items By concordance is meant the maintaining of the same word for each source language equivalent where it appears. Concordance can be handled in different ways in translation: from full concordance (one source language word, one receptor language word, regardless of sense differences); to limited concordance (one source language word, few receptor language words according to sense differences); to minimal concordance (one source
43
language word, few or some target language words according to sense differences and context driven; to no concordance at all (that is, full contextsensitive translation with no attempt to maintain any polisemy concordance at all) (Floor, 2007:9). Sense is the understanding or content of the ST to be translated (Munday, 2001: 20). While, context focuses the attention on the situations in which lexical symbols (items) occur (Nida, 1964: 38). Moreover, context has three features based on Halliday and Hasan (1985: 12) i.e. 1) field refers to what is happening, that in this case is explained to be the translation of a spiritual text; 2) tenor refers to who is taking part, that means the translator and those readers who are interested in spiritual text, in particular Yogasutra; 3) mode refers to what part of language is playing, that in this case is related to either spoken or written (the channel), and also such categories of text rhetorical purposes as persuasive, expository, didactic, and the like. By these criteria an attempt to distinguish the types of translation can be made. According to Floor (2007:12), there are two general types, namely, resemblant translation and interpretative translation. These two types are subdivided into four different translation types, by two axes: one axis is the degree of adjustments away from the original form, designated as the contrast between closer and more open, another axis is the degree of resemblance to the semantic content, from more resembling the semantics of the source language message to more interpreting and making the message more explicit.
44
2.2. The translation type grid
Resemblant Interpretative
Close Type 1: Close resemblant Type 3: Close interpretative
Open Type 2: Open resemblant Type 4: Open interpretative
1) Close resemblant translation This type is fully form oriented, in the sense that both the source language meaning and form are followed as guide. Close semantic resemblance is the goal and the minimum adjustments are made to make translation readable. A close resemblant translation is source-language-sensitive translation, with no attempt to make the source language implicit information explicit, except when some language-specific linguistic explicit information is required to prevent ungrammatical forms in the receptor language. It prefers to have one-to-one correspondent terms for key terms and unknown terms. There is also full, or almost full, lexical concordance, especially in the area of key terms (Floor, 2007:13-14).
2) Open resemblant translation This is the type of translation that is oriented to semantic resemblance of the original as much as possible, but at the same time making some limited adjustments to render the translation more idiomatic and communicative. Concerning implicit information is made explicit, some semantic adjustments are made: minimal key term concordance is pursued, with attempts to find equivalents for the different subsenses. Sometimes, choice of terms will be driven only by the context and will disregard any
45
concordance. Unknown terms are generally minimally adjusted for clearer communication (Floor, 2007:14).
3) Close interpretative translation This type has some resemblance to the original semantic content, but is basically an interpretative translation in spite of the fact that its level of interpretation is still constrained and limited. Concerning semantic adjustments, close interpretative translation follows a general policy of limited concordance, by sense only, and is similar to type 2 in this regard. It follows limited concordance, but it is even less concordant than open resemblant translation, allowing more freedom. Unknown terms are somewhat adjusted for clearer communication (Floor, 2007:15).
4) Open interpretative translation This type can also be called free translations, the semantic resemblance orientation to the original is minimal but extensive interpretative resemblance is the rule. The source language form is disregarded as much as possible, at times to the extreme. In terms of semantic adjustments, open interpretative translation follow limited concordance, normally by sense only, but often even beyond that to no concordance at all, preferring a full context-sensitive approach to words. Unknown terms and key terms are freely adjusted for clearer communication (Floor, 2007:15-16).
46
2.3. Types of translation considering two criteria (key terms and concordance of lexical items
Close resemblant Key terms and Maintained unknown terms Concordance
Full concordance
Open resemblant Minimally adjusted for clearer communication Limited concordance: by sense only
Close interpretative Maximally adjusted for clearer communication Mixture limited concordance by senses, and context-driven
Open Interpretative Generally not maintained Minimal concordance: mostly by senses and context-driven
