Name : Septiani Putri R.

Toding
Class :B
Reg. no : 217 112 154
No.hp : 085342643861
Code : A1M2T

Definition of Translation
According to Manser (1996:441), translation is the activity of changing something
spoken or written into another language. It means that whatever we are doing with something
(e.g. information, idea), when changed into another language is called translation. Next we will
see some other definitions stated bysome linguists.

Nida and Taber (1974 : 12) state that translating consists of reproducing in the receptor
language (RL) the closest natural equivalent of the source language (SL) message, first in terms
of meaning, and secondly in terms of style. Here, we know that in reproducing the message there
is a good relationship between RL and SL that should be equivalent.

Catford (1965:1) defines that translation is an operation performed on languages: a

process of substituting a text in one language for a text in another.The writer assumes that all of
the activities of transferring a text from one language to another are called translation.

Larson (1984:1) states that translation consists of studying the lexicon, grammatical
structure, communication situation, and cultural context of the SL text, analyzing it in order to
determine its meaning, then reconstructing the same meaning using the lexicon and grammatical
structure which appropriate in the RL and its cultural context. Larson also says that translation
has three steps; they are studying the source text, analyzing it and reconstructing the meaning.

Newmark (1988:28) says that translation is rendering the meaning of a text into another
language in the way that the author intended the text. In short, the meaning of a text should be
the same with the author’s aim when it is translated.

Yusuf (1994 :8) says that “terjemahan dapat diartikan sebagai semua kegiatan manusia
dalam mengalihkan seperangkat informasi atau pesan baik verbal maupun non-verbal- dari
informasi asal atau informasi sumber ke dalam informasi sasaran” (translation can be defined as
all of human activities in transferring information or message-verbal or non-verbal- from original
information into target information). It means that when we transfer information from one source
to another then we do translation.
Simatupang (1999:2) defines translation as “menerjemah adalah mengalihkan makna
yang terdapat dalam bahasa sumber ke dalam bahasa sasaran dan mewujudkannya kembali di
dalam bahasa sasaran dengan bentuk-bentuk sewajar mungkin menurut aturan-aturan yang
berlaku dalam bahasa sasaran”(translating is transferring the meaning of SL into RL and
rewaken it in RL withnatural forms that follow the valid rules in RL). It means that translation is
closerto the meaning than the style (form) but translation should follow the rules oftarget
language.

From the definitions above, the writer may say that translation is defined as the process of
transferring the idea or information from the source language to the target language. For
instance, when a teacher explains his idea to the students, he does a translation activity, i.e. he
transfers the idea (the material of the lessons) from his mind to the students by using language
that can be understood by them. In short, in wider meaning translation is the process of
transferring the meaning of the idea, verbally and non-verbally from one to another. The RL
reader’s response to the translation work has to be the same with the SL reader’s response to the
original text itself. Actually, the response of the SL and the RL readers will never be identical
because the difference in both readers (cultural and historical settings).

The following example shows how a translation work makes the different response we put our
head together. If the sentence is translated into Bahasa Indonesia as kami meletakkan kepala
kami bersama-sama, the response or idea is different from English. In other words, the response
of the English people and Indonesian people is not the same. The response or understanding will
be the same if it is translated as bermusyawarah. The same response between the source and
receptor readers can reach the goal if the message expressed as natural as possible in the RL.
From all of the explanations above, the writer assumes that there are four important elements in
translation. They are: source language, text, equivalence, and receptor language. Source language
is the original language of a work that is used by its author to assert his idea. Text is the material
of a work that will be translated. Equivalence is the suitable form whether in meaning and style.
While receptor language is the aim language that has been translated from the SL.

Translation is a mental activity in which a meaning of given linguistic discourse is rendered from
one language to another. It is the act of transferring the linguistic entities from one language in to
their equivalents in to another language.

Translation is an act through which the content of a text is transferred from the source language
in to the target language (Foster, 1958). The language to be translated is called the source
language (SL), whereas the language to be translated into or arrived at is called the target
language (TL). The translator needs to have good knowledge of both the source and the target
language, in addition to a high linguistic sensitivity as he should transmit the writer's intention,
original thoughts and opinions in the translated version as precisely and faithfully as possible.
Due to its prominence, translation has been viewed differently.

According to Ghazala (1995), "translation is generally used to refer to all the process and
methods used to convey the meaning of the source language in to the target language" (P.1.
Ghazala's definition focuses on the notion of meaning as an essential element in translation. That
is, when translating, understanding the meaning of source text is vital to have the appropriate
equivalent in the target text thus, it is meaning that is translated in relation to grammar, style and
sounds (Ghazala, 1995).

Translation is a process and a product. According to Catford (1995), translation is the

replacement of textual material in one language (SL) by equivalent textual material in another
language (TL) ", (p 20). This definition shows that translation is a process in the sense that is an
activity. Performed by people through time, when expressions are translated in to simpler ones in
the same language (Rewording and para-phrasing). It can be done also from one language into
another different language.
Translation is, on the other hand, a product since it provides us with other different cultures, to
ancient societies and civilization life when the translated texts reaches us (Yowell and Mutfah,
1999).

According to Brislin (1976: 1) translation is a general term referring to the transfer of thoughts
and ideas from one language to another, whether the language is in written or oral form, whether
the languages have established orthographies or not; or whether one or both languages is based
on signs, as with signs of the deaf.
Another expert, Wilss (1982: 3), states that translation is a transfer process which aims at the
transformation of a written source language text (SLT) into an optimally equivalent target
language text (TLT), and which requires the syntactic, the semantic, and the pragmatic
understanding and analytical processing of the source text. Syntactic understanding is related to
style and meaning. Understanding of semantics is meaning related activity. Finally, pragmatic
understanding is related to the message or implication of a sentence. This definition does not
states what is transferred. Rather, it states the requirement of the process.

Nida and Taber (1982: 12) see translating as a process of reproducing in the receptor language
the closest natural equivalent of the source language message, first in terms of meaning and
secondly in terms of style. In other words, translation is a transfer of meaning, message, and style
from one SLT to the TLT. In the order of priority, style is put the last. Here the things to
reproduce (transfer) is stated, message.

Newmark (1991: 27) defines the act of translating very briefly. It is the act of transferring
meaning of a stretch or a unit of language, the whole or a part, from one language to another.
(The discussion on meaning can be seen at sub-point F. Meaning, Message, and Style.)

According to the purpose, translation can be divided into four types: (a) pragmatic, (b) aesthetic-
poetic, (c) ethnographic, and (d) linguistic translation (Brislin, 1976: 3-4). Pragmatic translation
is the translation of a message with an interest in accuracy of the information meant to be
communicated in the target language form. Belonging to such translation is the translation of
technical information, such as repairing instructions. The second type is aesthetic-poetic
translation that does not only focus on the information, but also the emotion, feeling, beauty
involved in the original writing. The third is ethnographic translation that explicates the cultural
context of the source and second language versions. The last type is linguistic translation, the one
that is concerned with equivalent meanings of the constituent morphemes of the second language
and with grammatical form. Seen from this classification, the translation of literary work should
be the aesthetic-poetic one.

The other kinds of translation or translation approach important to review are the ones related to
the concept of dynamic translation, semantic translation, communicative translation, and artistic
translation.

Dynamic translation tries to transfer the messages or ideas into a target language and to evoke in
the target language readers the responses that are substantially equivalent to those experienced
by the source text readers (Nida and Taber, 1982 :28). A definition of dynamic translation
centers on the concept of dynamic equivalence, that is the closest natural equivalence to the
source language message. Hohulin (1982: 15) notices that the definition of dynamic translation
contains three essential terms: (a) equivalent, which points toward the source language message,
(b) natural, which points toward the receptor language, and (3) closest, which binds the two
orientations together on the basis of the highest degree of approximation. Dynamic equivalence
approach can be used in the level of translating sentences or group of sentences, because the
whole message lies here.

Similar to the above concept is the idiomatic translation developed by Beekman and Callow (in
Gutt, 1991: 68). It resembles the dynamic equivalence approach in the sense that it rejects the
form-oriented translation and emphasizes that a translation should convey the meaning of the
original. A translation, according to this approach, should be faithful to the ‘dynamics’ of the
original, or the SL’s ‘naturalness’ of language use and ease of comprehension.

The idea of dynamic translation was first proposed by Nida and Taber and the semantic and
communicative translation was by Newmark. He even states that the concepts represent his main
contribution to general theory of translation (Newmark, 1991: 10). It seems to be a reaction to
the concepts of formal and dynamic equivalence, literal and free translation. In the above
dichotomy, the first “pole” of the dichotomy (formal equivalence and literal translation) seems to
be condemned for being not be able to transfer the message. Semantic and communicative
translation seem to be in the middle of the two poles formal and dynamic translation. (Here
formal translation is understood as translation that pursues the formal equivalence and dynamic
translation is the one that seeks for the dynamic equivalence. Discussion on the issue of
equivalence can be seen in the next sub-point.)

Semantic translation emphasizes the “loyalty” to the original text. It is more semantic and
syntactic oriented and, therefore, also author-centered. On the other hand, communicative
translation emphasizes the loyalty to the “readers” and more reader-centered. The two concepts
are not to be contrasted with literal word-for-word translation which is criticized in the concept
of formal translation and literal translation. He sees it as a translation procedure. He states that
literal word-for-word translation is not only the best in both communicative and semantic
translation, but it is the only valid method of translation if equivalent effect is secured
(Newmark, 1991: 10-11).

He further maintains that, in fact, there is no pure communicative or pure semantic method of
translating a text. There are overlapping bands of methods. A translation can be more or less
semantic as well as more or less communicative. Even a part of a sentence can be treated more
communicatively or more semantically. Anyhow he maintains that the more important the
language of the text or units of text, e.g. in the sacred texts, the more closely it should be
translated. Finally he points out that meaning is complicated, many-leveled, a ‘network of
relation’. The more generalization and simplification is done, the less meaning is gotten. From
this discussion, it can be argued that the choice between semantic and communicative approach
is done in the level of translating sentences or even parts of sentence (Newmark, 1991: 10).

In the area of literary translation, Chukovsky (1984) offers the concept of artistic translation.
Like the other types of translation, meaning is a very important point to consider. Yet, style is
taken as importantly as the other aspects for style is the portrait of the author; so when a
translator distorts his style he also distorts ‘his face’ (Chukovsky, 1984: 20). Besides the
meaning, impression on the readers should also be kept the same. This translation expert states
that it is essential that the readers of the translation should be carried into the very same sphere as
the readers of the original, and the translation must act in the very same nerves (Chukovsky,
1984: 80).

In my opinion translation is something about how we can understand another language by

knowing that language or is one way to producing the equivalent of meaning in the different
verbal expression.