A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF TRANSLATION

library.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

i

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF

TRANSLATION TECHNIQUES TO THE TRANSLATION

QUALITY IN THE TRANSLATION OF NAUTICAL AND

FISHERY TERMS FROM THE NOVEL “THE OLD MAN AND

THE SEA”

THESIS

Submitted as a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for Sarjana Sastra Degree

of English Department Faculty of Cultural Sciences

Sebelas Maret University

by:

AGIL MAHARDHIKA

C0308017

ENGLISH DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF CULTURAL SCIENCES

SEBELAS MARET UNIVERSTY

SURAKARTA

2016


ii


iii


iv

PRONOUNCEMENT

Name : AGIL MAHARDHIKA

NIM : C0308017

Stated whole-heartedly that this thesis entitled A COMPARATIVE

ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF TRANSLATION TECHNIQUES TO

THE TRANSLATION QUALITY IN THE TRANSLATION OF

NAUTICAL AND FISHERY TERMS FROM THE NOVEL “THE OLD

MAN AND THE SEAis originally made by me. It is neither a plagiarism, nor

made by others. All of the information which relates to other people’s works are

written in quotation and stated in the bibliography.

If the pronouncement is proven to be incorrect or the writer cheated, I am

ready to take the responsibility.

Surakarta, 18 April 2016

The Researcher

Agil Mahardhika


v

DEDICATION

I dedicate this thesis to:

My father and my late mother

All of my brothers

PCM Family


vi

MOTTO

Happiness depends upon ourselves - Aristotle

Learning without thinking is useless, but thinking without learning is very

dangerous - Soekarno


vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Firstly, as the author of this thesis, I want to give the biggest thanks to The

Almighty God for the bless, love, and guidance in the process of completing this

thesis. However, this thesis will not be completed without any supports and

encourages from many people. Hence, I really would like to give special thanks

to:

1. The Dean of Faculty of Cultural Sciences, Drs. Riyadi Santosa, M.Ed.,

Ph.D. for approving this thesis

2. The Head of English Department, Drs. Agus Hari Wibowo, MA, Ph.D. for

giving permission to compose this thesis.

3. Prof. Drs. M.R. Nababan, M.Ed., MA, Ph.D. as my thesis supervisor,

thank you very much for your great patience, guidance, and advice in

completing this thesis.

4. My academic supervisor, Dra. Sri Kusumo Habsari, M.Hum, Ph.D., for

always giving me support to finish my study.

5. All of lecturers in English Department who have given me a lot of

valuable knowledge, lessons, and great experience.

6. Mr. Bayu Budiharjo, S.S., M.Hum and Mr. Sumardiono, SS. M.Hum as

my raters, big thanks to you for giving time, ideas, and contributions in

completing this thesis.

7. My beloved Father, late Mother, and my brothers Yudha, Adonis, and

Mage. Thanks for loving and supporting me so much.


viii

8. Big family of Palaphyska, who always reminds me to finish my thesis

9. Big family of PCM, thanks for your support, spirit, friendship, and

brotherhood.

10. English Department, especially ED ’08. Thanks for all of the college

experience.

Finally, I realize that this thesis is still far from perfect. Hence, I wish

people to give criticism and suggestions to this thesis.

Surakarta, 18April 2016

Agil Mahardhika


ix

TABLE OF CONTENT

Thesis Cover ................................................................................................... i

Approval by Thesis Supervisor ...................................................................... ii

Approval by Board of Examiners ................................................................. iii

Pronouncement .............................................................................................. iv

Dedication ...................................................................................................... v

Motto ............................................................................................................. vi

Acknowledgement........................................................................................ vii

Table of Content ............................................................................................ ix

List of Tables............................................................................................... xiv

List of Figures .............................................................................................. xv

Abstract ....................................................................................................... xvi

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 1

A. Research Background ................................................................................ 1

B. Research Problems .................................................................................... 4

C. Research Objectives .................................................................................. 5

D. Research Limitation .................................................................................. 5

E. Research Benefits ...................................................................................... 5

F. Thesis Organization ................................................................................... 6

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................ 8

A. Definition of Translation ........................................................................... 8

B. Translation Techniques ............................................................................. 9


x

a. Adaptation .................................................................................................... 9

b. Amplification ............................................................................................... 9

c. Borrowing ..................................................................................................... 10

d. Calque .......................................................................................................... 11

e. Compensation ............................................................................................... 11

f. Description .................................................................................................... 11

g. Discursive Creation ...................................................................................... 12

h. Established Equivalent ................................................................................. 12

i. Generalization ............................................................................................... 12

j. Linguistic Amplification ............................................................................... 13

k. Linguistic Compression ............................................................................... 13

l. Literal Translation ......................................................................................... 13

m. Modulation .................................................................................................. 14

n. Particularization ........................................................................................... 14

o. Reduction ..................................................................................................... 15

p. Substitution .................................................................................................. 15

q. Transposition ................................................................................................ 15

r. Variation ....................................................................................................... 16

C.Technical Terms Translation ........................................................................ 16

D. Nautical and Fishery Terms ........................................................................ 17

E. Translation Quality Assessment .................................................................. 18

1. Accuracy ...................................................................................................... 18

2. Acceptability ................................................................................................ 19


xi

3. Readability ................................................................................................... 20

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................ 21

A. Research Type and Design .......................................................................... 21

B. Data and Source of Data .............................................................................. 23

C. Sampling Technique .................................................................................... 24

D. Technique of Data Collection ..................................................................... 25

1. Content Analysis .......................................................................................... 25

2. Focus Group Discussion .............................................................................. 26

E. Technique of Data Analysis ........................................................................ 29

F. Research Procedures .................................................................................... 31

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ...................... 34

A. Research Findings ....................................................................................... 34

1. Translation Technique Found in Nautical and Fishery Terms Translation.. 34

1.1 Single Technique ........................................................................................ 35

1.1.1 Amplification .......................................................................................... 35

1.1.2 Description .............................................................................................. 36

1.1.3 Established Equivalent ............................................................................ 36

1.1.4 Generalization ......................................................................................... 37

1.1.5 Literal ...................................................................................................... 38

1.1.6 Modulation .............................................................................................. 39

1.1.7 Particularization ...................................................................................... 40

1.1.8 Reduction ................................................................................................ 41

1.1.9 Transposition ........................................................................................... 42


xii

1.2 Couplet Technique ..................................................................................... 44

1.2.1 Particularization + Transposition ............................................................ 44

1.2.2 Reduction + Transposition ...................................................................... 45

1.2.3 Established Equivalent + Transposition .................................................. 45

1.2.4 Established Equivalent + Linguistic Amplification ................................ 47

1.2.5 Established Equivalent + Amplification ................................................. 48

1.2.6 Established Equivalent + Borrowing ...................................................... 49

1.3 Triplet Technique ....................................................................................... 50

1.3.1 Established Equivalent + Linguistic Amplification + Transposition ...... 50

2. Translation Quality Assessment of Nautical and Fishery Terms ................. 52

2.1 Accuracy of Translation ............................................................................. 53

2.1.1 Accurate Translation ............................................................................... 53

2.1.2 Less Accurate Translation ....................................................................... 56

2.1.3 Inaccurate Translation ............................................................................. 60

2.2 Acceptability of Translation ....................................................................... 62

2.2.1 Acceptable Translation ........................................................................... 62

2.2.2. Less Acceptable Translation .................................................................. 65

2.2.3 Unacceptable Translation ........................................................................ 67

3. Translation Quality Assessment from version A and B ............................... 69

B. Discussion ................................................................................................... 71

1. Translation techniques found in the nautical and fishery terms translations 72

2. The effects of translation techniques on the quality of the translation in term of

accuracy and acceptability ............................................................................... 76


xiii

3. The differences and similarities of nautical and fishery terms translation in

version A and B ................................................................................................ 84

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ........................ 87

A. Conclusion ................................................................................................... 87

B. Recommendation ......................................................................................... 89

BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................ 91

APPENDICES ................................................................................................. 93


xiv

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 ..........................................................................................................27

Table 3.2 ..........................................................................................................27

Table 3.3 ..........................................................................................................28

Table 3.4 ..........................................................................................................29

Table 3.5 ..........................................................................................................30

Table 3.6 ..........................................................................................................31

Table 4.1 ..........................................................................................................34

Table 4.2 ..........................................................................................................69

Table 4.3 ..........................................................................................................70

Table 4.4 ..........................................................................................................70

Table 4.5 ..........................................................................................................71

Table 4.6 ..........................................................................................................76

Table 4.7 ..........................................................................................................80


xv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1 ........................................................................................................55

Figure 4.2 ........................................................................................................57


xvi

ABSTRACT

Agil Mahardhika. A Comparative Analysis of the Impact of Translation

Techniques to the Translation Quality in the Translation of Nautical and

Fishery Terms from the novel “The Old Man and The Sea”. Thesis: English

Department. Faculty of Cultural Sciences. Sebelas Maret University. 2016

This research focuses on the nautical and fishery terms translation found in

the novel entitled “The Old Man and The Sea”. The research objectives are

divided into two parts. They are (1) to compare the translation techniques, (2) to

compare the impact of translation techniques to the translation quality.

This research applied descriptive qualitative method. A purposive

sampling technique was employed in this research. The technique of data

collection for this research is content analysis and focus group discussion. Content

analysis is applied to collect the data of nautical and fishery terms while focus

group discussion is applied to collect the data for translation techniques and

translation quality.The data of nautical and fishery terms were collected from the

Indonesian version entitled Lelaki Tua dan Laut translated by Yuni Kristianingsih

Pramudhaningrat (Version A) and Old Man and The Sea translated by Dian Vita

Ellyati (Version B).

The analysis of translation techniques shows that there are 11 types of

translation techniques. They are divided into three variant techniques of single,

couplet, and triplet techniques. In version A, there are 8 single variant techniques,

4 couplet variant techniques, and 1 triplet variant techniques. Single variant

techniques consist of established equivalent, generalization, description, literal,

amplification, modulaton, transposition, and reduction. Couplet variant techniques

consist of particularization + transposition, established equivalent + transposition,

established equivalent + linguistic amplification, and established equivalent +

amplification. Then, triplet variant technique consists of established equivalent +

linguistic amplification + transposition. Meanwhile, in version B, there are 7

single variant techniques, 4 couplet variant techniques, and 1 triplet variant

technique. Single variant techniques consist of established equivalent,

generalization, transposition, particularization, literal, modulaton, and reduction.

Couplet variant techniques consist of established equivalent + transposition,

established equivalent + linguistic amplification, established equivalent +

borrowing, and reduction + transposition. Then, triplet variant technique consists

of established equivalent + linguistic amplifcation + transposition.

The analysis of the translation accuracy and acceptability show that

version A has average score of accuracy 2,64 and average score of acceptability

2,74. Meanwhile, version B has average score of accuracy 2,67 and average score

of acceptability 2,88. Furthermore, the final score of translation quality for version

A is 2,68 while version B is 2,75. It shows that version B has better translation

quality than version A.

Documents

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF TRANSLATION