7

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)

10

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-

11

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.

12

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

13

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

14

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

15

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

16

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

17

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.

18

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.

19

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

20

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

21

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

22

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.

23

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

24

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

25

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

26

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 sourcelanguage 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

27

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

28

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

29

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 nonequivalence 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

30

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

(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 Thaitranslated 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.

32

(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

33

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.

34

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

35

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

36

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

37

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

38

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.

39

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

40

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

41

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

42

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

43

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.

44

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 :

Translation Studies

Theory of Equivalence by
Mona Baker (1992)

Equivalence
at word level

Equivalence
above word
level

Grammatical
equivalence

Textual
equivalence

Pragmatic
equivalence

45

Common Problems
of Non Equivalence
at word level

The translation
materials in the
Discovery of North
Sumatera
Guidebook 2011

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.

Source language
(English) and Target
language (Indonesian)

Figure 2.7 Conceptual Framework