UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

“ANALYSIS ON THE IMPACT OF MISTRANSLATIONS IN ZOOTOPIA’S (2016)

INDONESIAN SUBTITLE TOWARDS THE RACISM REFERENCES AND THE
CONSTRUCTIVIST PARADIGM”

MAKALAH NON-SEMINAR

NISYA PUTRI SHALIHA

1406539500

FAKULTAS ILMU PENGETAHUAN BUDAYA

PROGRAM STUDI INGGRIS
DEPOK
JANUARI 2018
Analysis on the Impact of Mistranslations in Zootopia’s (2016)
Indonesian Subtitle Towards the Racism References and the
Constructivist Paradigm

Nisya Putri Shaliha

English Department, Faculty of Humanities, Universitas Indonesia
nisyaputrishaliha@yahoo.com

Abstract

This research examines the Indonesian subtitle of Zootopia (2016) and its impact
towards the racism references and the constructivist paradigm. It aims to see the change of
meaning that occurs during the translation process. This research tries to answer the question
whether mistranslations cause the removal of racism references in Zootopia and if they also
change the constructivist purpose. Three references are studied using methods of translation
theory by Peter Newmark (1988), and the findings are further evaluated using constructivism
theory by Vladimir Tatlin (1913). The method used in analyzing them is qualitative. The results
show that in the Indonesian subtitle, the references are translated using literal translation
method, which eliminates the understanding of racism. As a consequence, the constructivist
paradigm of the movie changes from racial discrimination to discrimination that can happen to
anyone. It can be concluded that this research confirms that the mistranslations in Zootopia
(2016) eliminate the meaning of the racism references and change the constructivist paradigm to
mere discrimination.

Key words: subtitle, translation, constructivism, racism, discrimination

Introduction

“Translation is that which transforms everything so that nothing changes”, said

Gunter Grass in his novel The Tin Drum (1995). This poetic quotation supports Peter
Newmark’s (1988), a linguist and a major figure on Translation Studies, definition of
translation, which is “rendering the meaning of a text into another language in the way
that the author intended the text”. Translation is now used for many works including
movies, which can be found in three forms: subtitle, voice-over, or dubbing. They are
used for different reasons, such as the target audience and a country’s regulation on
foreign movies (Schwarz, 2012).
 In Indonesia, the translation form used in the movies aired on cinemas is
subtitle. This is because voice-over and dubbing are only allowed for movies with
educational and/or research purposes, not commercial movies (Indonesian Law Number
33 of 2009, Article 43). Subtitle, essentially, functions to help audience understand the
storyline thoroughly. However, mistranslations of the subtitle can lead the meaning to
be slightly or completely different and give ambiguous, inaccurate, or even deceptive
messages.
Over the years, researchers have studied mistranslations of subtitle. One study
conducted by Haq (2017) found that the Indonesian subtitle of the movie Contraband
(2012) mostly used literal translation. He also found that the mistranslations are caused
by the lack of equivalent words and different point of views between two cultures. For
instance, “your old man getting jailed freak you out, huh?” was translated to “masuk
penjara membuatmu ketakutan, kan?” which completely erases the phrase “your old
man”. Haq (2017) argued that this mistake was caused by the lack of understanding of
“old man” as a cultural term meaning father, and thus the translator thought it was the
person that the character was talking to that was going to be arrested.
Another research by Amri (2017) on the Indonesian subtitle for Django
Unchained (2012) agreed that mistranslations can happen due to socio-cultural
differences. An example of this is the sentence “you niggers are gonna understand
something about me”, which was translated to “kalian semua harus tahu tentang aku”.
Amri (2017) explained that the change of the word “niggers”, which is highly cultural,
to “semua”, which is a neutral word for “all”, might have been caused by the
misunderstanding of racial issues in the US.
These previous studies only focus on the causes of the mistranslations without
much discussion on their impacts towards the cultural issues and the paradigm of the
movie. Therefore, this research sets to fill this gap by focusing on the impact of the
translation.
The corpus of this research is Disney’s Zootopia (2016). In the story, Zootopia
is said to be a city which becomes a melting-pot of animals of all species. Carnivores
and herbivores live together in peace; their history of being predators and preys has long
been forgotten. The city slogan itself is “anyone can be anything”. However, when a
countryside-born bunny Judy Hopps moves there to work as a police officer, she
realizes that Zootopia is not a utopia after all. There are still many prejudices among
different species, which also causes Judy to be assigned as only a parking meter officer.
However, having always wanted to solve difficult crimes, Judy becomes involved in a
case where 14 mammals are missing. She is then accompanied by Nick Wilde, a fox, on
her adventure to find the suspect.

The message that Zootopia embodies is full of one cultural issue that has an
important part in the home country of its producers: racism. By using animals as
symbolizations of American people, Zootopia’s way of discussing racism in a movie for
children, from its history to its impacts in today’s American society, has received many
praises in humanity researches. According to Farrell (2016), Zootopia talks about
racism in a light-hearted and innovative manner with animal characters as
symbolization of human beings so that the message is understood easily. Xue (2016)
agrees that Zootopia’s dialogs have references and implications of racial issues that the
audience has to decipher.

However, there are also criticisms on Zootopia’s way of tackling racism. Since
the prejudices come from and happen to all species of animals, it is not clear whether it
is the predators (carnivores) or the preys (herbivores) that are supposed to be the
oppressed group that symbolizes people of color in American society (Lang, 2016;
Blumenfeld, 2016; Haddad, 2016; Briscoe-Smith, 2016;). As a result, Lang (2016)
argues that the problem in Zootopia is caused by individual characters who have certain
prejudices to certain species, but there is no real systematic power that harms one
specific group in the way racism does in real life’s society.

Nevertheless, it is agreed upon that the dialogs in Zootopia explicitly comment

on racism in America (Lang, 2016; Blumenfeld, 2016; Haddad, 2016; Briscoe-Smith,
2016;). Quoting the dialogs such as “we reserve the right to refuse service” and “you
can’t just touch a sheep’s wool”, Haddad (2016) praises the movie as well-written in
bringing up easily recognizable stereotypes and discriminations found in everyday life’s
racism. She believes that the movie’s intention is to include moments of past and
present racism as a lesson about acceptance and that people can learn to be better at
accepting diversity.
 Thus, Zootopia in its core is constructivist. Vladimir Tatlin (1913) started
constructivism in art in Russia, stating that art has social purposes (Turl, 2015). The
movement was joined by the Bolshevik revolutionists in spreading their propaganda
through art (Turl, 2015). Now, often used by the media such as movies, constructivism
shapes a certain issue for people to see it in a particular way. For example, the popular
movie Into the Wild (2007) tells the story of Christopher McCandless, who refuses to
accept the norms of modern life and leaves his family and career to live in the Alaskan
wilderness. By putting scenes such as Christopher abandoning his car and setting fire to
his money, Into the Wild sends a quite explicit message of anti-conformity (Herd,
2013). In relation to Zootopia, the constructivist purpose can be seen from dialogs that
talk about racism in a light-hearted manner to make it a lesson for the audience.
Zootopia shows that if everyone puts aside all their prejudices on each other’s race and
works together for equality, a change for the better can happen.

The problem arose when Zootopia was aired in Indonesia with Indonesian
subtitle. The racism references seemed to lose their essence, which then causes the loss
of constructivism as well, and it raises a question whether this was caused by inaccuracy
during the translation process. Thus, this research will argue that the inaccurate method
of translation in the Indonesian subtitle of Zootopia (2016) eliminates the racial
references to mere discrimination and changes the constructivist paradigm.

In this research, the theory used is based on Peter Newmark’s (1988) methods of
translation. Although there are eight methods, the ones that will be applied are literal,
free, and communicative translations. First of all, as a method that falls into the Source
Language (SL) Emphasis category, in literal translation the translator pays attention to
the grammar, but he still translates the text literally. He does not see the context and
only translates the words exactly as they are written in the original text. Secondly, as a
part of Target Language (TL) Emphasis category, free translation is a re-writing of the
text without being faithful. The translator is free to use paraphrases, either longer or
shorter than the original text. Lastly, also falling into the TL Emphasis category, in
communicative translation the translator converts the meaning to suit the context in the
TL as if he is in a conversation with the audience. Therefore, they can easily understand
it. Later in the conclusion, the result of this analysis will show which method is used
and why it causes the removal of racism references in the translation.

In analyzing the translation, this research has limitations. First, it will focus on
the source and target texts as they are, not on the possibility that the translator chose
certain words with a specific motive. Second, it will not talk about the audio-lingual
aspect of the film, such as the intonation and pitch. Third, the standard subtitle
guidelines, for instance, “Subtitles should avoid 3 lines or more,” (BBC Subtitle
Guidelines, 2017) will not be put into account in the analysis. Fourth, the possibility
that the target audience might not understand the political situation in the US at all will
not be regarded. Fifth, the data will be taken only from three dialogs which have clear
references to racism but the translations lack them, and they will all be about
discrimination on the preys (herbivores) for reasons stated later in the analysis.
The data will go through four steps. The first one is that both the Source Text
(ST) and the Target Text (TT) are put side by side in a table. Next, also in the table,
Back Translation is provided so that non-Indonesian speakers can understand the
changes that happen in the translation. Then the ST and TT are compared, and any
findings on the elimination of the racial issues in the subtitle are analyzed qualitatively.
Lastly, these findings are examined using constructivism theory.

Analysis

This analysis compares the dialog (English) and the subtitle (Indonesian) side by
side in a table. Then the back translation is provided in the next column. In the last
paragraph, the findings are evaluated using constructivism.

“Cute” and the ‘n’ word

Source Text Target Text Back Translation

Clawhauser: Clawhauser: Clawhauser:

“I gotta tell you, you are “Kuakui, kau lebih imut “I admit, you are cuter than
even cuter than I thought dari yang kubayangkan!” I thought you’d be!”
you’d be!”

Judy Hopps: Judy Hopps: Judy Hopps:

“You probably didn’t
know, but a bunny can call
another bunny ‘cute’, but
when other animals do it…
it’s a little...”
“Mungin kau tak tahu,
kelinci boleh memanggil
kelinci lain ‘imut’, tapi
ketika hewan lain
melakukannya… itu
sedikit…”
“Maybe you don’t know, a
bunny can call another
bunny ‘cute’, but when
other animals do it… it’s a
little…”

Clawhauser: Clawhauser: Clawhauser:

“I am so sorry! Me, “Maaf! Aku, Benjamin “Sorry! Me, Benjamin

Benjamin Clawhauser, the Clawhauser, polisi gendut Clawhauser, a flabby
guy everyone thinks is just penggemar donat telah donut-loving cop, has
a flabby donut-loving cop, meremehkanmu.” underestimated you.”
stereotyping you. Oh…”

The conversation above is a reference to the ‘n’ word as a racial slur when
uttered by non-black people (Briscoe-Smith, 2016). When it is used by the members of
the slurred group, however, it functions as an expression of in-group camaraderie
among themselves (Allan, 2016). Here, Judy Hopps, a bunny cop, is talking to a tiger
cop, Clawhauser. Clawhauser uses the word “cute” to describe Hopps’ appearance. The
way Hopps explains that a bunny can call another bunny “cute” but not for other
animals to do it too is a clear reference to the ‘n’ word (Mueller, 2017).

The ‘n’ word itself, which stands for “nigger” or “nigga”, is a derogative term
which was first used during the slavery era. According to African American Registry
(2013), the word originated from the Spanish word “negro” which means black and was
used to differentiate black people from white people, ensuring that their place was
below the whites. After the abolishment of slavery in 1865 and segregation in 1964, the
term has been used by black people to each other as a symbol of struggle and
brotherhood after having been oppressed for hundreds of years (America’s Historical
Documents, 2016). Black people born today also carry this history because despite not
experiencing the struggle first-hand, they are still discriminated at school, workplace,
and other public places. This is because racism is a systemic, institutional oppression
(Feagin in Cole, 2017). Since people outside the black community do not share the
same struggle experience, they do not have the right to use the word (Briscoe-Smith,
2016). The ‘n’ word is now an in-group term.

The problem arises in the translation of the word “stereotyping” to

“meremehkan”. According to Oxford Dictionary (2017), “stereotype” as a noun means
“a person or thing that conforms to a widely held but oversimplified image of the class
or type to which they belong”. Therefore, “stereotype” as a verb means classifying a
person based on an oversimplified image. Meanwhile, the word “meremehkan” means
the act of underestimating or belittling someone, so the essence is different.

In addition, “stereotyping” here specifically refers to stereotyping the species of

the animal (bunny), which is a symbol for a person’s race (black people). Therefore, the
translation should have that reference to racism too, but “meremehkan”, or
“underestimating”, does not have the same sense as “stereotyping”. This of course
might be caused by a specific aim of the translation, but as it has been stated before, this
research focuses on language-related issue, not on the motives that the translator may
have on choosing certain words.

Thus, the mistranslation might have happened because there is a lack of word
equivalence in the Indonesian language. In Indonesian, according to Kamus Besar
Bahasa Indonesia Daring (2016), “stereotip” is a noun and adjective, but it is not a verb.
Therefore, “stereotyping you” cannot be translated into “menstereotipkanmu”, and this
is most likely why the translator used another word whose meaning goes straight into
underestimating someone. Unfortunately, this eliminates the racism reference.

It is also important to note how the translation simplifies the phrase “the guy
everyone thinks is just a flabby donut-loving cop” to “polisi gendut penggemar donat”,
which is only “a flabby donut-loving cop”. The omitting of “the guy everyone thinks is
just” changes the value of the dialogue. It is supposed to symbolize how a person’s
seemingly harmless appearance does not stop him from being racist (even if he does not
think it is racist). Unfortunately, the translation loses this meaning and presents the
character of Clawhauser differently, in which in this scene he is only a cop being
impolite to another cop.

Furthermore, there is a connection between the two clauses. The word

“stereotyping” is rightly chosen because the stereotypes are shown for both sides: that
all bunnies are cute and that all cops highly favor donuts. It also conveys irony, that is, a
person who often gets stereotyped is stereotyping another person. Thus, the
mistranslation and the omission done in the subtitle eliminates this perfectly written
reference.

If the translation was closer to the source language and added explanation for the
word “stereotyping”, it would impact the audience differently. It is important to note,
however, that this paper disregards the standard subtitle guidelines, including line
breaks, number of words, and pace of speech (BBC Subtitle Guidelines, 2017). For
example, it could be, “Maaf! Aku, Benjamin Clawhauser, yang orang-orang pikir
hanyalah polisi gendut penggemar donat, telah terbawa stereotip dan menggunakan
kata yang tidak seharusnya,” which means, “Sorry! I, Benjamin Clawhauser, the guy
everyone thinks is just a flabby donut-loving cop, has been carried away by stereotype
and used a word I should not have used”. They would understand that, based on his
appearance and personality shown in the movie, what Clawhauser said is not right and
unexpected. They would also get the message that anyone who has been stereotyped can
also stereotype another person, and it is just as bad. Furthermore, this translation would
make sure that the audience know that Clawhauser used a word he should not have, and
this has a bigger chance for them to connect it to the ‘n’ word themselves.

Sheep vote and the votes from communities of people of color

Source Text Target Text Back Translation

Bellwhether: Bellwhether: Bellwhether:

“I never get to do anything “Aku tak pernah melakukan “I have never done
this important.” sesuatu sepenting ini.” anything this important.”

Judy Hopps: Judy Hopps: Judy Hopps:

“But you’re the Assistant “Tapi kau Asisten Wali “But you’re the Assistant
Mayor of Zootopia.” Kota Zootopia.” Mayor of Zootopia.”

Bellwhether: Bellwhether: Bellwhether:

“Oh, I’m more of a “Aku hanya sekretaris “I’m just an ordinary

glorified secretary. I think biasa. Kurasa Wali Kota secretary. I think Mayor
Mayor Lionheart just Lionheart hanya ingin Lionheart just wanted
wanted the sheep vote.” dukungan dari domba.” support from sheep.”

In the dialog above, Bellwhether, a sheep that has become the Assistant Mayor
of Zootopia, complains to Judy Hopps that her position is merely a glorified name for a
secretary. Her tasks have always been limited to doing what the Mayor of Zootopia,
Lionheart, tells her to do, and she is never involved in something as important as what
she is doing now with Hopps. In fact, she thinks that Mayor Lionheart chose to run with
her in the election only so that he could get votes from the sheep community.

This conversation is a reference on how people of color are often lied to during
the election period so that white politicians can ingratiate them and gain votes from
their communities (Lapin, 2016). To illustrate how much a community’s vote influences
an election, in the recent Senate election in Alabama, US. Doug Jones became the first
Democrat to win a Senate seat in 25 years because 96% of black people voted for him
(Naylor, 2017). However, in some cases, when these politicians are elected, the
promises are quickly forgotten. In other words, they deceive these communities just to
get the vote and nothing else.

An example of this is shown in the last presidential election in the US. Trump,
during his campaign, said that the percentage of unemployed black youth in 2016 was
58% even though the right percentage was 25.2% (Kiely, 2016). He was very confident
in his lies, saying that his programs would be able to decrease this percentage down in
order to gain votes from the black community. Now that he is president, all the
programs that he said would help black youth get jobs are not even in discussion
anymore (Timm, 2017).

Bellwhether’s situation thus becomes a reference to this, as she was only chosen
to be the “Assistant Mayor of Zootopia” because Mayor Lionheart needs the votes from
the sheep community, not that he really intended to have a partner in running the city or
that he cared about the community. Later, nearing the end of the movie, Lionheart’s
dishonest concern on his people is discovered by Hopps, who found that Lionheart has
locked up all the missing animals in cages in a facility that only he knows to avoid
people thinking he is not a capable mayor for not being able to solve his city’s problem.
He is then jailed.

The first translation that is a bit incorrect here is the phrase “more of a glorified
secretary”, which is translated to “hanya sekretaris biasa”. According to Oxford
Dictionary (2017), “glorify” means “describe of represent as admirable, especially
unjustifiably”. In other words, it is implied that Bellwhether was chosen to be the
Assistant Mayor not because of her own merits but more of her background. However,
the translation, “hanya sekretaris biasa” or “just an ordinary secretary”, does not reflect
the same implied meaning. What happens here is actually a modulation in point of view,
in which Indonesians have a different way of seeing the situation. It is possible that the
translator thinks “hanya sekretaris biasa” is enough because Bellwhether is essentially
Lionheart’s secretary now. Unfortunately, this makes the racism reference lose its
meaning because what should be highlighted is the fact that Bellwhether, as part of the
sheep community, was chosen to be the “Assistant Mayor” only to get the community’s
vote, and now her work is just the same as a secretary.
 Secondly, “dukungan dari domba” is quite imprecise. “The sheep vote”, which
is a reference to the black vote or votes from other communities of people of color,
means the political votes from a whole community of sheep. On the other hand,
“dukungan dari domba”, meaning “support from sheep”, does not have the same sense
as a community. This is also a modulation but in terms of scope, with “the sheep vote”
having a wider meaning and “dukungan dari domba” having a narrower meaning.

If there were no space constraints in subtitling, the translator could add clearer
explanation, the audience would likely understand the reference better. For example, it
could be, “Asisten Wali Kota hanyalah gelar yang berlebihan untuk pekerjaanku yang
seperti sekretaris. Kurasa Wali Kota Lionheart hanya ingin dukungan dari kelompokku,
kaum domba,” which means, “Assistant Mayor is a glorified title for my job which is
more like a secretary. I think Mayor Lionheart just wanted support from my group, the
sheep community”. They would realize that Bellwhether is being used in the politics
world, just like marginalized people often are. As a result, there is a bigger chance the
audience would relate it to the political situation in the United States, where the movie
creators come from, and figure out which community(s) the “sheep vote” refers to.

Sheep’s wool and black people’s hair

Source Text Target Text Back Translation

Nick Wilde: Nick Wilde: Nick Wilde:

[Touching Bellwhether’s [Touching Bellwhether’s [Touching Bellwhether’s

wool] “So fluffy!” wool] “Lembut sekali!” wool] “So soft!”

Judy Hopps: Judy Hopps: Judy Hopps:

“Hey!” “Hei!” “Hey!”

Nick Wilde: Nick Wilde: Nick Wilde:

“Sheep never let me get “Domba tak “Sheep do not let me get
this close.” mengizinkankusedekat ini.” this close.”

Judy Hopps: Judy Hopps: Judy Hopps:

“You can’t just touch a “Kau tak bisa menyentuh “You cannot touch a
sheep’s wool!” bulu domba!” sheep’s wool!”

Nick Wilde: Nick Wilde: Nick Wilde:

“It’s like cotton candy.” “Bagaikan gulali.” “It’s like cotton candy.”

Judy Hopps: Judy Hopps: Judy Hopps:

“Stop it!” “Hentikan!” “Stop!”

In this scene, Nick and Judy are waiting for Bellwhether, who is a sheep, to
finish typing on her computer. Out of curiosity, Nick touches Bellwhether’s wool and is
surprised by how fluffy it is. Either very focused on her typing or too fed up to scold
Nick for being rude, Bellwhether does not say anything. However, knowing it is wrong
of Nick to touch Bellwhether’s wool, Judy warns him and tells him to stop.

This conversation is a reference to the act of touching people of color’s hair,

especially black people, who have distinctive characteristics of hair as it is usually curly
and thick (Haddad, 2016). According to Phoebe Robinson, the writer of the book You
Can’t Touch My Hair: And Other Things I Still Have to Explain (2016), in her interview
with McAlpine (2016), people who touch black people’s hair, whether they realize it or
not, will do something disrespectful. If they look confused by the hair, think it is weird,
or mock it, then they have treated black people as something less than “normal” people.
If they are jealous, they think it is fascinating, or they excessively praise the hair, then
they have also othered black people as exotic and different than them. This means that
no matter the response, touching a black person’s hair just to know how it feels like is a
racist act. Doing it in an admiring manner is just as othering as calling them names or
treating them differently in the workplace. Racism does not only mean treating a certain
race as subordinate but also as anything different than the “normal” people.

The procedure of translation that diminishes this important message is the

omission of “just” in “you can’t just touch a sheep’s wool” to only “kau tak bisa
menyentuh bulu domba”. This omission erases the essence that touching a sheep’s wool
is impolite. Therefore, it is not that one cannot touch a sheep’s wool, but one cannot
touch a sheep’s wool just like that because it is rude to do so. Unfortunately, the
mistranslation results in a different meaning, making it sounds like it is impossible to
touch a sheep’s wool.

Secondly, the phrase “tak bisa” has a different sense from “can’t”. The modal
“can” has two meanings: “be able to” and “be permitted to” (Oxford Dictionary, 2017).
In Indonesian, however, the verbs used for ability (“boleh”) and permission (“bisa”)
are different. Therefore, the more accurate translation of the sentence would be “kau tak
boleh menyentuh bulu domba sembarangan”, meaning “you can’t just touch a sheep’s
wool randomly”. Then the audience would be more likely to understand this as a
disrespectful act that should not be done, and they have a higher chance to realize that
this is a reference to touching black people’s hair.

The focus on herbivores

As seen from the three data, this research is limited in that it only focuses on
racism references in dialogs that discriminate herbivore characters. This is because,
though it has been established before by various researches that Zootopia presents
discrimination on both sides, the plot revolves around the herbivores being the “lesser”
group. The tables turn only nearing the end of the movie when carnivores are blamed
for their “savageness”. Herbivores start to have the upper hands, stereotyping all
carnivores to be the same as the missing mammals who have gone “savage”. This is
also a racism reference because people of color are often called “savage” and
“primitive” for their “backward” culture to create a sense of otherness (Paulat, 2014).
 However, at the end of the movie it is revealed that Bellwhether, a herbivore, is
the actual cause of the carnivores-go-missing-then-turn-wild problem. She purposely
creates a potion that can turn any animal wild, but she targets only the predators because
she is fed up of the discrimination that she experiences daily, so she wants to take
revenge. This constructs the racial issue to be taken as a lesson because it teaches how
revenge and wanting to be the “better group” by oppressing the oppressor is the wrong
way to reach equality. Unfortunately, losing meaning in the racism references means
also losing this constructivist paradigm that the movie tries to do.

The failure to be constructivist

The findings on this research establish that the racism references in Zootopia are
lost in translation. Faithful to the source text, the translation ends up being too literal.
The result is a stiff subtitle which also eliminates the movie’s constructivism. The
intention to assure the audience that racism’s impacts in society should be learned,
criticized, and made as a guideline towards a better change is removed. For a movie,
free and communicative methods of translation would have worked better as suggested
in the analysis, for it can give more space to translate the text by including explanation
of the racial issues in the movie while still putting the focus in the target language.

Conclusion

The findings of this research confirm that the inaccurate translation of the
Indonesian subtitle Zootopia (2016) did detract the racism references. Firstly, there is a
loss meaning of “cute” as a derogatory term because the subtitle hinders the objective of
the source text, which refers to the unexpected use of the ‘n’ word from non-black
people. Secondly, the simplified translation of “glorified secretary” and “sheep vote”
deprives this dialog of its original reference, which talks about the struggles that people
of color have to go through in American politics. Lastly, the omission of the word “just”
erases the message that touching a black person’s hair just like that is disrespectful and
degrading.
 These losses of the racism references in the translation show that the translator,
in terms of semantic meaning, did focus more on being faithful to the source text,
resulting in a literal and quite stiff subtitle. This eliminates the constructivist paradigm
that the movie has, which is how the impacts of racism in real life’s society are harmful
and dehumanizing, so from these references the audience should be able to criticize
themselves and do better as a society to create change. Therefore, for the translator to be
able to explain more about the racial issues to Indonesian audience and keep the
constructivist paradigm, it would be better to use free and communicative methods. This
way, the translator would not merely replace English with Indonesian but also deliver
the message in a manner that the audience thoroughly understands.

However, it is also important to remember the limitations of this research. Since

this research does not analyze the motive of the translator, take the standard subtitle
guidelines into account, or consider the possibility that literal translation was
intentionally used because the target audience might not be aware of the political
situation in the US, then the translator may have deliberately put aside the racism
references. In doing so, he has successfully delivered the movie as purely entertainment.

All of these findings should be useful for future researchers who wish to study
movie subtitle to see how translation can change the message a movie wants to spread.
Translators should also take this research into consideration because these results prove
that they not only have to be fluent in the Source Language (SL) and Target Language
(TL), but they should also be aware of the cultural issues in the SL and able to transfer
them in the TL.

References:
African American Registry. (2013). Nigger (the word), a brief history. Retrieved from:
http://www.aaregistry.org/historic_events/view/nigger-word-brief-history

Allan, K. (2016, July 20). Contextual determinants of the meaning of the N word.
Spingerplus Journal, 5 (1). Retrieved from:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4954799/
America’s Historical Documents. (2016). 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:
Abolition of Slavery. Retrieved from: https://www.archives.gov/historical-
docs/13th-amendment

Amri, N. (2017, May). Kriteria dalam Penerjemahan Subtitle Film Django Unchained
dari Bahasa Inggris ke Bahasa Indonesia. Jurnal Kata: Penelitian tentang Ilmu
Bahasa dan Sastra, 1 (1). Retrieved from:
http://ejournal.kopertis10.or.id/index.php/kata/article/view/1953

Blumenfeld, Z. (2016, March 11). How Zootopia Nails the Relationship Between
Prejudice and Racism. Retrieved from:
https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/03/zootopia-nails-the-
relationship-between-prejudice.html

Briscoe-Smith, A. (2016, March 23). Three Lessons from Zootopia to Discuss with
Kids. Retrieved from:
https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/three_lessons_from_zootopia_to_di
scuss_with_kids

Can. (2017). Oxford Dictionary. Retrieved from:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/glorify

Cole, N. (2017, April 14). Definition of Systemic Racism in Sociology. Retrieved from:
https://www.thoughtco.com/systemic-racism-3026565

Farrell, A. (2016). How Zootopia Can Inspire Acceptance and Change. Lexia:
Undergraduate Journal in Writing, Rhetoric & Technical Communication, 5.
Retrieved from:
http://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1064&context=lexia

Glorify. (2017). Oxford Dictionary. Retrieved from:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/glorify

Grass, G. (1959). The Tin Drum. Munich: Hermann Luchterhand Verlag.

Haddad, A. (2016, April 4). Zootopia braves the world of racism, prejudice, and
discrimination. Retrieved from:
http://disneyexaminer.com/2016/04/04/zootopia-braves-the-world-of-racism-
prejudice-and-discrimination-film-opinion/

Herd, S. (2013, April 9). Implicit and Explicit Ideology in Film. Retrieved from:
https://steveherd.wordpress.com/tag/into-the-wild/

Haq, Z. (2017, January). Penerjemahan Subtitle dari Bahasa Inggris ke dalam Bahasa
Indonesia (Penelitian Analisis Isi pada Subtitle Film Contraband). Deiksis
UNINDRA, 9 (1). Retrieved from:
http://journal.lppmunindra.ac.id/index.php/Deiksis/article/view/931

Howard, B. & Moore, R. (2016). Zootopia (DVD). Florida: Disney.

Indonesian Law Number 33 of 2009. Article 43. Retrieved from:

http://www.bkpm.go.id/images/uploads/prosedur_investasi/file_upload/UU_33_
2009.pdf

Kiely, F. (2016, February 24). Fact Check: Trump and the Black Vote. Retrieved from:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/02/24/fact-check-
trump-and-black-vote/80863480/

Lang, N. (2016, March 11). How Disney’s Zootopia Gets Racism Wrong. Retrieved
from: https://consequenceofsound.net/2016/03/how-disneys-zootopia-gets-
racism-wrong/

Lapin, A. (2016, March 4). 'Zootopia': A Nimble Tale Of Animal Instincts And Smart
Bunnies. Retrieved from: http://www.wbur.org/npr/468318485/zootopia-a-
nimble-tale-of-animal-instincts-and-smart-bunnies

McAlpine, C. (2016, November 26). You Need to Listen to Why Phoebe Says 'You
Can't Touch My Hair'. Retrieved from: https://medium.com/feminist-culture-x-
52/you-cant-touch-my-hair-8803b14e1363
Mueller, G. (2017). The Racial Politics of Zootopia. Retrieved from:
https://medium.com/@gavinmueller/the-racial-politics-of-zootopia-
e3ce14453209

Naylor, B. (2017, December 13). ‘Black Votes Matter’: African-Americans Propel

Jones To Alabama Win. Retrieved from:
https://www.npr.org/2017/12/13/570531505/black-votes-matter-african-
americans-propel-jones-to-alabama-win

Newmark, P. (1988). A Textbook of Translation. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall.

Paulat, E. (2014, September 10). Savages: A Pervasive Racist Trope We Ought to Drop.
Retrieved from: http://www.care2.com/causes/the-savages-a-pervasive-racist-
trope-we-ought-to-drop.html

Sajan. (2016, April 7). The prons and cons of dubbing and subtitling. Retrieved from:
https://www.sajan.com/the-pros-and-cons-of-dubbing-and-subtitling/

Schwarz, B. (2012). Translation for Dubbing and Voice-Over. The Oxford Handbook
for Translation Studies. Retrieved from:
http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199239306.001.
0001/oxfordhb-9780199239306-e-027

Stereotip. (2017). Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia Daring. Retrieved from:

https://kbbi.kemdikbud.go.id/entri/stereotip

Stereotype. (2017). Oxford Dictionary. Retrieved from:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/stereotype

Timm, J. (2017, April 27). Promises, Promises: What Trump Said He Would Do But
Hasn't. Retrieved from: http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/president-trumps-
first-100-days/promises-promises-what-trump-said-he-would-do-hasn-t-n748531

Turl, A. (2015, October 5). Constructivism: The Avant-Garde and the Russian
Revolution. Retrieved from: http://www.redwedgemagazine.com/online-
issue/constructivism-notes-on-art-revolution
Xue, S. R. (2016, May 23). Research on the Narrative Art and Social Value of Zootopia
in the Film and Television Animation. Scientific Research Publishing Inc., 4,
37-40. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/adr.2016.42006