THEORY OF TRANSLATION

METHODS AND IDEOLOGIES OF TRANSLATION

Ajeng Anindya Putrisanti F1F012063

Nuning Kurniati F1F012045

Ema Yonanda Sakanti F1F012071

Romario Gema P. F1F012067

ENGLISH AND LITERATURE

SOCIAL AND POLITICAL FACULTY

UNIVERSITY OF JENDRAL SOEDIRMAN

2014

Methods and Ideologies of Translation

1. Introduction

According to Wilss (1982: 3), translation is a transfer process which aims at the

transformation of a written SL (Source Language) text into an optimally equivalent TL

(Target Language) text, which requires the syntactic, the semantic and pragmatic

understanding and analytical processing of the SL. To translate a text from SL, the

translator needs to use method and ideology. There are some methods and ideologies

which can be used by the translator to translate SL text into TL text.

2. Methods of Translation

In Cambridge dictionary, method is particular way of doing something. In

translation, method means plan and systematic way of doing translation. A selection of

the method is needed with careful consideration of the target audience, type of text, and

the translation purpose. For example, when the translators want to translate text for the

children, they have to considerate to use method which will not difficult the target

audience.

According to Newmark in his book entitled A Textbook Translation (1988), there

are eight methods of translation which are categorized in two sections; the closest method

to the Source Language (SL) and the closest method to the Target Language (TL).

Newmark puts it in diargram V.

SL emphasis TL emphasis

Word-for-word translation Adaptation

Literal translation Free translation

Faithful translation Idiomatic translation

Semantic translation Communicative translation

Word-for-word Translation

The SL word order is preserved and the words translated by their most common

meaning, out of context. Cultural words are translated literally. The main use of this

method is either to understand the mechanics of the source language or to construe a

difficult text as pre-translation process.

For example: Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres. (Latin)

Become: Gallia is all divided in parts three. (English)

Literal Translation

The SL grammatical constructions are converted to their nearest TL equivalents but

the lexical items are again translated out of context.

For example: So che questo non va bene. (Italian)

Become: Know (I) that this not goes (it) well. (English)

Faithful Translation

A faithful Translation attempts to reproduce the precise contextual meaning of

the original within the constraints of the TL grammatical structures. It transfers

cultural words and preserves the degree of grammatical and lexical 'abnormality'

(deviation from SL norms) in the translation. It attempts to be completely faithful to the

intentions and the text-realisation of the SL writer.

For example: The word “dog”(English) is translated into Anjing in Indonesia.

Semantic Translation

Semantic translation is objective and neutral, only to translate naturally, is not

adding, reduce or repairing. It only changes the meaning and text force of source

language to the target language. Semantic translator should be considered element of

esthetic text of source language with compromise the meaning since in fittingness.

For example: He is a book-wormed (English)

Become: Dia adalah orang yang suka sekali membaca buku (Indonesia)

“Book-wormed” is translated flexibly appropriate with culture

context and functional restriction that accepted in target language.

The translator avoids using the idiom “Kutu Buku” in TL to

translate this sentence.

Free Translation

Free translation reproduces the matter without the manner, or the content without the

form of the original. Free Translation is the act of rendering the sense of a source

document, rather than slavishly dragging source words and word order into the

translation. Understanding of both cultures is also important in free translations. Fluency

for target readers is more important than fidelity.

For example: Translating a children’s book uses a certain vocabulary to make the

children understand the story.

Adaptation

In adaptation, the translator works on changing the content and the form of the ST

(Source Text) in a way that conforms to the rules of the language and culture in the TL

(Target Language) community. In general, this procedure is used as an effective way to

deal with culturally-bound words/expressions, metaphors and images in translation. That is,

the translator resorts to rewriting the SL text according to the characteristics of the TL text.

For example: She is innocent as an egg. (English)

Become: Elle est innocente comme un agneau. (France)

The example uses the term ‘agneau’ (lamb) in France as a cultural

equivalent for the word ‘egg’, since the latter conveys a bad

connotation, which is imbecility.

Idiomatic Translation

Idiomatic translation reproduces the message of the source text but tend to distort

nuances of meaning by preferring colloquialisms and idioms. It is a question of whether

an idiom with a similar meaning is available in the target language. If the idiom in the

source language is different from the target language, but it has the same meaning, so the

translators use the idiom from the target language.

For example: Out of frying pan into the fire (English)

Become: Keluar dari mulut buaya masuk ke mulut singa (Indonesia)

Communicative Translation

Communicative translation attempts to render the exact contextual meaning of

the original in such a way that both content and language are readily acceptable

and comprehensible to the readership. In such cases the translator substitutes SL word

with an existing concept in target culture. In cultural substitution the propositional

meaning is not the same but it has similar impact on target reader.

For example: Beware of the dog (English) translated into Awas anjing galak (Indonesia)

Galak is the word that is used in TL (Indonesia), so the translators put it to

make it clearer for the reader even in SL, there’s no word “vicious” to

express the word “galak”.

3. Ideologies of Translation

Ideology of translation is the set of principle which has to be considered by the

translators. According to Tymoczko (2003), ‘the ideology of translation resides not

simply in the text translated, but in the voicing and stance of the translator, and in its

relevance to the receiving audience’ (pp. 182–83).

Based on Venuti (1995), translation consists of two ideologies. They are:

a) The translator as a writer of the target text: Domestication

Domestication is a translator’s ideology when meaning is maintained. The translation

is disposed to the target language to be understood well. This ideology has purpose to

fulfill the reader’s need where they can read the translation smoothly. The point is

translation should be understandable, readable for the audience in target language. For

instance, the translators translate “bilik” from Indonesia into English as “house”.

b) The translator as a reader of the source text: Foreignization

Foreignization is a translator’s ideology where the cultural features from SL are

maintained. The translators translate the SL text by maintaining its cultural features. The

purpose of this ideology is to show the value of the SL, so the readers in TL can enrich

their knowledge by reading the text. For instance, instead of using “kaus dalam”, the

translators still use “singlet” for translating word from English to Indonesia.

4. Conclusion

Translation method is a way to do translate and based on Newmark, there are eight

methods which are written in diagram V form. Ideology of translation is set of

principle which helps translators to do the translating. According to Venuti, there are

two ideologies of translation, i.e. Domestication and Foreignization. However, the use

of method and Ideology depends on the translators’ purpose and style. Which method

and ideology that they use does not matter, the important thing is the message from

SL is understandable by the TL.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Newmark, Peter. A textbook of Translation. UK: Prentice Hall International Language Teaching, 1988.

Venuti, L. The translator’s invisibility: A History of Translation. London/New York: Routledge, 1995.

Cheshire. “English Only : Literal Translation”. Wordreference. 6 April 2007. 10 May 2014. <http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=454512>

Moi, Say. Society and Culture: Faithful Translation. Yahoo Answer. 15 June 2008. 10 May 2014. <https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081112115046AAivNWD>

Izza, Laitul. Communicative and Semantic Translation. Blog. 1 December 2010. 10 May 2014. <http://lailatulizza.blogspot.com/2010/12/communicative-and-semantic-translation.html>

Mizani, Samira. Cultural Translation. Translation Directory. 15 July 2013. 10 May 2014. <http://www.translationdirectory.com/articles/article1507.php>

Zakhir, Marouane. Translation Procedures. Translation Directory. 17 April 2013. 10 May

2014. <http://www.translationdirectory.com/articles/article1704.php>

Eftekhari, Negar. A Brief Overview on Idiomatic Translation. Translation Directory. 15

August 2013. <http://www.translationdirectory.com/articles/article1739.php>