Blennes (1990) in the article “Some Thoughts on the Process of Translating the Urantia Book” mentions that a translator should re-create the text in his own native language in such a way that the reader of the translation reacts to it as an English reader reacts to an English text.

Bell (1991: 7) defines translator as a communicator who is involved in written communication. Thus, in terms of attributes of a professional translator, Newmark (1991: 46) made his own descriptions:

A translator must be a member of an autonomous and nationally accepted professional body consisting only translators –not language teachers, interpreters, or Sprachmittler, i.e. people working partly in translation or other language activities.

Taking role of translator is required someone to put attention on his/her ability of conveying messages. Little mistakes in translation will cause damages in works.

Taken from: “A Comparative study on the Translation Methods used in Three Indonesian Translated Versions of Kahlil Gibran’s The Broken Wings” by Mahardhika Zifana (2006)

Larson (1984: 16) then adds that in applying the literal translation, there is rarely a true literal translation. The methods spread in the continuum from very literal, to literal, to modified literal, to near idiomatic, idiomatic, and unduly free. The continuum is drawn as follow:

Larson’s Continuum of Translation Methods

Larson (1984: 16-18) further explains:

1) Very literal is a completely interlinear translation. For some purposes, it is desirable to reproduce the linguistic features of the source text, as for example, in a linguistic study of that language;

2) Literal translation is a translation which its sounds like nonsense and has little communicative value. It may be very useful for the purposes related to the study of the source language, they are of little help to speakers of the receptor language who are interested in the meaning of the source language text;

3) Modified literal methods are a way to modify order and grammar of the source language in an acceptable sentence structure in the receptor language. However, the lexical items are translated literally.

4) Inconsistent mixture mixes literal and idiomatic translation in the final draft of translation.

5) Near idiomatic reproduces the meaning of the source language (that is the meaning intended by the original communicator) in receptor language without losing the natural form of the source language.

6) Idiomatic translation reproduces the meaning of the source language (that is the meaning intended by the original communicator) in the natural form of receptor language.

7) The unduly free translation adds extraneous information, which is not stated in the source text. It changes the meaning of SL; it distorts the fact of the historical and cultural setting of the source text.

Newmark (1988: 45-47) uses eight terms in his classification. They are word-for-word, literal, faithful, semantic, communicative, idiomatic, free, and adaptation that divided into two scopes –the methods closest to the source language and the methods closest to the target language. He put them in the form of a flattened V diagram as follows.

Newmark’s V Diagram

(1) The methods closest to the source language

a) Word-for-word Translation. The Source Language is translated word by word.

b) Literal Translation. The SL grammatical forms are converted to their nearest target language equivalent. However, the lexical words are translated out of context.

c) Faithful Translation. This method tries to reproduce the precise contextual meaning of the original within the constraint of the TL grammatical structures. It transfers cultural words and faithfully follows the SL grammatical forms.

d) Semantic Translation. This method concerns the aesthetic value-that is the beautiful and natural sound-of the SL text. In addition, the method compromises on an appropriate meaning. So, that no assonance, or repetition jars in the translation.

(2) The methods closest to the target language

a) Free Translation. Free translation is the translation which is not bonded structure and manner.

b) Adaptation. This method is the freest form of translation. It is frequently used for plays (comedies) and poetry.

c) Idiomatic Translation. Idiomatic translation reproduces the message of the source text but tend to distort nuances of meaning by preferring colloquialisms and idioms.

d) Communicative translation. This method 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.

Prior to Newmark and Larson, Robet Holmes (1970) cited in Gentzler (1993: 91) mentions that there are four methods of translation. First method retains the form of the original. The second attempts to discern the function of the text in the receiving culture and seeks parallel function within the target language tradition. The third is content-derivative, taking the original meaning of the primary text and allowing it to develop into its own unique shape in the target language. The fourth deliberately retains minimal similarity for other purposes, for which Holmes gives no example.

André Lefevere (1975) quoted in Gentzler (1993: 93) further enrich Holmes’ description. He states that there are seven methodologies which tend to govern the translation process –especially in the translation of poetry. They are:

1) Phonemic translation, which attempts to reproduce the SL precisely in TL.

2) Literal translation, which distorts the sense and the syntax of the original through word-for-word emphasis.

3) Metrical translation, which reproduce the SL metre.

4) Poetry into prose, which changes both of sense and syntax of the SL.

5) Rhymed translation, where the translator enters into a double bondage of metre and rhyme.

6) Blank verse translation. Again the restrictions imposed on the translator by the choice of structure are emphasized, although the greater accuracy and higher degree of literalness obtained are also noted.

7) Interpretation. Interpret the theme and re-writes it to make the text easier for reception.

Newmark (1981:22) adds that there are two best methods translations. They are (1) Communicative translation, in which the attempts is to produce the same effect on the target language readers, and (2) Semantic translation, in which the translation attempts within the bare syntactic and semantic constraints of the target language, to reproduce the precise contextual meaning of the author. From those methods above, both Newmark (1981: 23) and Larson (1984: 17) explain that the selection of the appropriate translation methods plays an important role in making a good translation. It means that the TL readers read the translation text with confidence that the text they read sounds like the original text.

Several Indonesian experts of translation, such as Machali (2000: 50) and Widyamartaya (1989: 20) notice that Newmark’s methods of translation are the clearest and it can be observed in a translation text.

The use of translation methods depends on the translator needs. Whatever method he/she uses, the main point in translation is to carry messages in source language into the target language well.

Larson (1984: 51) states; in translation, the form of the source language is replaced by the form of the target language. Larson further explains that the language forms refer to the actual word, phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, etc which are spoken or written. Nida and Taber (in Widyamartaya, 1989:11), similarly states that translating consists of reproducing the receptor language to the closest natural equivalent of the source language message, first in the term of meaning and secondly in the term of style. Bassnett (1991: 2) says that what is generally understood as translation involves the rendering of a source language (SL) text into the target language (TL). Catford (1965) quoted in Machali (2000: 5) mentions that translations is the replacement of textual material in one language (SL) by equivalent textual material in another language (TL). According to Damono in Kompas (21^st June 2003), translation is transferring ideas by using several languages as medium.

Widyamartaya (1989: 13) states that a good translation should not be read as a translation, the translation should be read like a piece of original composition and must express the whole meaning of the original. Larson (1984: 6) mentions the characteristics of a good translation as follows:

1. Use the normal language forms of the receptor language

2. Communicate to the receptor language speakers the same meaning that was understood by the speaker of the source language.

3. Maintain the dynamics of the original source language text.

Based on those statements and characteristics, I conclude that translation produces the meaning of SL (that is meaning intended by the original communicator) in the natural form of the receptor language.

Barnwell in Edy (2000: 15) emphasizes that a best translation could be judged on aspects of accuracy, clarity, and naturalness. The definitions are as follows:

1. Accuracy means the content of the translation must be identical with that of the original text.

2. Clarity means the translation must convey the information clearly.

3. Maintain the dynamics of the original source language text.

Newmark (1982:7) also believes that it becomes a craft and an art to make a creative translation. He states that translations is a craft consisting in attempts to replace a written message and/or statement in one language by the same message and/or statement in one language by the same message and/or statement in other language.

Thus, a translator may face a problem of not finding a translation equivalent. In addition to this, Larson (1984:56) mentions:

There will be the words in the source language and receptor language that are very similar in context (contain the same meaning components), but not all will match by any means. Not all language communities have the same ideas.

From the statement above, Larson believes that language combines meanings differently and a translator has to accept its consequences that there will be many words which do not have an exact word equivalent in the receptor language. Considering the fact that a single word may be translated by one word or by a number of words in the receptor language, and that the lexical structures of the two languages are different, then the way the concepts are expressed will be different.

Nida & Taber’s Process of Translating

The analysis phase is the process in which grammatical relationship and the meaning of words or its combination are analyzed. In the transfer phase, the already analyzed materials in phase 1 are transferred in the translator’s mind from SL into TL. The reconstruction phase is the phase where the writer rewrites or re-expresses the materials in such a way that the translation product is readable and acceptable in terms of rules and styles in the TL.

Bell (1991: 60) models the process of translation as cascaded and interactive process which contains three major stages –syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic processing. Each of this has to be involved in both analysis and synthesis. He adds that it is (a) possible for some stages to be passed through quickly, and (b) the norm for processing to be a combination of bottom-up and top-down, i.e. the analysis (and later synthesis) of the clause is approached simultaneously by both pattern-recognizing procedures and by inferencing based on previous experience and expectations. Bell, further explains that the process is not linear one in which stage follows stage in strict order. It is an integrated process in which, although every stages must be past through, the order is not fixed and back-tracking, revision, and cancellation of previous decisions are the norm rather than the exception.

Weick cited in Robinson (1997:102) describes that the process of translation might be formulated as (1) translate: act; jump into the text feet first; translate intuitively. (2) Edit: think about what you’ve done; test your intuitive responses against everything you know; but intuitively too, allowing an intuitive first translation to challenge (even successfully) a well reasoned principle that you believe in deeply; let yourself feel the tension between intuitive certainly and cognitive doubt, and don’t automatically choose one over the other; use the act-response-adjustment cycle rather than rigid rules. (3) Sublimate: internalize what you’ve learned through this give-and-take process for later use; make it second nature; make it part of your intuitive repertoire; but sublimate it flexibly, as a directionality that can be redirected in conflictual circumstances; never, however, let subliminal patterns bind your flexibility; always be ready if needed “to doubt, argue, contradict, disbelieve, counter, challenge, question, vacillate, and even act hypocritically.”

Taken from: “A Comparative study on the Translation Methods used in Three Indonesian Translated Versions of Kahlil Gibran’s The Broken Wings” by Mahardhika Zifana (2006)

Language diversity and the development of science and knowledge lead people to communicate in different languages. Duff (1989:6) says that language competence is two ways, not one-way system. We need to be able to communicate in both ways: into and from the foreign language. Books understandably, place the great emphasis on competence in foreign language. Yet, little guidance is given on how to communicate back into the mother tongue, as many as professional need to do in their daily work. Translation is ideally suited for practicing this vital skill.

Because we need to be able to communicate in both ways, ability to translate texts from foreign language becomes important. Translation of texts and books are needed because people have to get the information and knowledge as soon as possible instead of spending times to have acquisition of foreign languages.

Translating a text is obviously not simple. According to Soemarno (2000) in Edy (2003:3), translating a text is very complicated because the translator should understand aspects related to the translation process of a text, such as the background of the text or cultural aspects.

In recent years, for the purpose of science, technology, and knowledge transfers, many texts and books are translated. Since the beginning of the reform era in Indonesia, many publishers have published translated version books. Publishing now becomes uninhibited. Kompas, a national daily newspaper, on 24^th May 2004 reports that to found a publisher, we do not need complex formal publisher licenses as in the era of Soeharto’s regime. As an impact, many English texts and books are translated into Indonesian versions by several translators at the same time.

Unfortunately, some translations are not easy to understand and it can make the readers disappointed. Kompas on 24^th May 2005 displayed statements made by several readers who declare that they are disappointed by translated version books. Such case can happen when the translator has not got mastery in both languages well. Sutiarti (2001) cited in Edy (2003:4) states that many translators make mistakes in translating a text because they do not master the foreign language well.

According to Sutiarti, translation activities are dealing with language. In other words, translating a text need the mastery of both languages involved. It is very important to master both of source language and target language well. Larsson (1984:6) points out that the best translation is the one, which uses the normal form of receptor (target) language. In accordance with Larsson, Newmark (1988:24) describes that for the vast majority of the texts, you have to ensure that (a) your translation makes sense; (b) that is read naturally, that is written in ordinary language.

Newmark (1988:9) says that in a narrow sense, translation theory is concerned with the translation method appropriately used for certain type of text and it is therefore dependent on functional theory of language. The type of the text needs proper methods related to the translation theory in a narrow sense, since each type of the text has its own styles and difficulties.

Larsson (1984:15) divides translation methods into two-main categories. They are (1) from based or literal translation and (2) meaning based or idiomatic translation. More specifically, Newmark (1988:45) describes various methods of translation, which are separated into the Source Language (SL) and Target Language (TL) emphasis. They are word-for-word translation, literal translation, faithful translation, and semantic translation on SL emphasis. On TL emphasis are adaptation, free translation, idiomatic translation, communicative translation.

The use of certain translation methods will have impacts on its result. It is because each type of the text has its own styles and difficulties, Newmark (1988:39) further classifies text types based on theories of Buhler (1965) for the purpose of translation. They are

1. the types of expressive text are literally works, authoritative statements, autobiography, essays and personal correspondences;

2. the informative texts are textbooks, technical reports, articles, scientific papers, theses, minutes or agenda of a meeting;

3. the vocative texts are notices, instructions, propaganda, publicity, and popular fiction.

A translator should be well trained in order to answer the problems of finding the appropriate methods to translate certain texts. The English Department of UPI is conducting translation class to train the translator-to-be. It is expected that the subjects of translation will train the English department students to be able to translate the English texts well.

Taken from: “A Comparative study on the Translation Methods used in Three Indonesian Translated Versions of Kahlil Gibran’s The Broken Wings” by Mahardhika Zifana (2006)

1. the types of expressive text are literally works, authoritative statements, autobiography, essays and personal correspondences;

2. the informative texts are textbooks, technical reports, articles, scientific papers, theses, minutes or agenda of a meeting;

3. the vocative texts are notices, instructions, propaganda, publicity, and popular fiction.

Following Newmark’s classification on text types above, we can see clearly that novel, which is a form of narrative fiction in certain length and written always in prose, is a vocative text.

Di Pippo (1971: 75) defines text as a united of paragraphs which contains a subject and thesis statement, expressed by the topic sentence.

Text types further demands the translator to acquire at least some basics of knowledge related to the text. In other words, this means that a translator should have a good comprehension on the text she/he handles. Reading references related to the knowledge may help translator in this matter so he/she can translate the text well.

Taken from: “A Comparative study on the Translation Methods used in Three Indonesian Translated Versions of Kahlil Gibran’s The Broken Wings” by Mahardhika Zifana (2006)

In translating English novels, changes like reduction, addition and modification of the intrinsic elements of the novels cannot be avoided. When SL in the novel is translated into TL, there cannot be transform all of the words. To find what changes are made from the English novel, a comparison (analysis) of the English version and Indonesia version can be done.

Edy (2003: 17) says that there can be two impacts resulted from the process of translation; positive impact and negative impact. The English novel translation can result a positive impact especially on the teaching of translation such a translation can be used as a medium in translation teaching to English students. The English novel-translation serves as a supplementary material that helps students understand the story better and comparing the language used both in the TL and SL.

Despite its positive impacts, the English novel-translation also has negative impacts to the readers. According to a research conducted by Remy Sylado in 2004 (Kompas, 24^th May 2005), many readers found some missing words in the novel-translation they read. Often, the readers feel hard to understand the English novel-translation. It can be happened when the translator does not translate the novel based on the translation principles or they does not understand the meaning contained in the TL (Edy: 2003: 18). Although there are several changes from the original version in an English novel-translation, the changes should not be significant. It also cannot be done to the elements which are important in the novel such as the intrinsic elements.

Many English novels are translated into Indonesian recently. Since the beginning of the reform era in Indonesia, many publishers have published translated version books. As an impact, many English texts and books are translated into Indonesian versions by more than a translator and are published by more than a publisher.

Consequently, some of the translations cannot be easy to understand. This can be happened when the translators have not got mastery in both languages well or they does not possess the principle of translation. Sutiarti (2001:1) states many translators make mistakes in translating a text because they do not master the foreign language well.

For that reason, comparing several different translated versions of an English novel is supposed to be also a valuable activity because the quality of translation will play important role in attracting reader’s interest and appreciation. The result of the activity may offer an alternative in providing the materials of translation teaching, helping the students to understand the implementation of translation methods and its impact to the result of translation.

Newmark (1988:184) comments that translations criticism is an essential link between translation theories with its practice. Criticism of translation is assuming a role of evaluation to the translated versions of a text, whether in the form of a critique or a graded assessment, is done by the way of a comparison between the original and the translation or between the translations (Newmark, 1988:185).

According to Newmark (1988:186) there are five topics to cover in criticism of translations:

(1) a brief analysis of the source language text stressing its intention and its functional aspects;

(2) the translator’s interpretation of the source language text’s purposes, his translation methods and the translation’s likely readership;

(3) a selective but representative detailed comparison of the translation with the original;

(4) an evaluation of the translation – (a) in the translator’s terms, (b) in the critic’s terms;

(5) where appropriate, an assessment of the likely place of the translation in the target language culture or discipline.

Text analysis, the analysis of SL assesses a meet of the quality of the language, assuming for example that he can reduce cliché to natural language in informative but not in authoritative texts Newmark (1988:186).

The translator’s purposes, attempts to see the text from the point of view of this translator, and is sometimes overlooked in translations criticism.

Comparing the text, how the translator has solved the particular problems of the SL text. The title, the structure, including the paragraphing the sentence connectives; shifts; metaphors; cultural words; proper names; neologism; ‘untranslatable’ words; ambiguity; level of language, etc.

The evaluation of translation, assesses the referential and pragmatic accuracy of the translation by the translator’s standards.

The translation’s future, assesses the work’s potential importance within the TL culture.

Novel translation deals with all aspects exist in both source and target language. So culture may become the main consideration for translators to put some change.

Sources:

Protherough, Robert. 1986. Teaching of Literature for Examinations. England. Open University Press.

Edy. 2003. An Analysis of Translated Versions of Agatha Christie’s ‘Appointment with Death’. A Paper. Bandung. FPBS UPI

Newmark, Peter. 1988. A Textbook of Translation. London. Prentice Hall International. UK.

Newmark, Peter. 1982. Approaches to Translation. London. Pergamon Press Ltd. Oxford.

Newmark, Peter. 1991. About Translation. London. Multilingual Matters Ltd. Clevedon

Zifana, Mahardhika. 2006. A Comparative Study on the Translation Methods Used in Three Indonesian Translated Versions of Kahlil Gibran’s ‘The Broken Wings’. A Paper. Bandung. FPBS UPI