THE PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS IN TRANSLATING
A LITERARY TEXT: TRACING THE TRANSLATION
PROCESS USING THINK-ALOUD PROTOCOL
AND SCREEN RECORDING METHOD
AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra
in English Letters
By
JULYAN ADHITAMA
Student Number: 124214109
ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS
FACULTY OF LETTERS
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
ii
THE PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS IN TRANSLATING
A LITERARY TEXT: TRACING THE TRANSLATION
PROCESS USING THINK-ALOUD PROTOCOL
AND SCREEN RECORDING METHOD
AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra
in English Letters
By
JULYAN ADHITAMA
Student Number: 124214109
ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS
FACULTY OF LETTERS
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
v
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY
I certify that this undergraduate thesis contains no material which has been
previously submitted for the award of any other degree at any university, and that,
to the best of my knowledge, this undergraduate thesis contains no material
previously written by any other person except where due reference is made in the
text of the undergraduate thesis.
Yogyakarta, April 10, 2017
vi
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH
UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS
Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma
Nama
: Julyan Adhitama
Nomor Mahasiswa
: 124214109
Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan
Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul
THE PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS IN TRANSLATING
A LITERARY TEXT: TRACING THE TRANSLATION
PROCESS USING THINK-ALOUD PROTOCOL
AND SCREEN RECORDING METHOD
beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan
kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan,
mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan
data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan memublikasikannya di internet atau
media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta izin kepada saya
maupun memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya
sebagai penulis.
Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenarnya.
Dibuat di Yogyakarta
Pada tanggal 10 April 2017
Yang menyatakan,
vii
The secret of getting ahead is getting started.
– Mark Twain –Everything is a learning process: any
time you fall over, it’s just teaching you
to stand up the next time.
– Joel Edgerton –By constant self–discipline and self–control you
can develop greatness of character.
– Grenville Kleiser –
Success is simple. Do what’s right,
the right way, at the right time.
– Arnold H. Glasow –
No matter how many times people try
to criticize you, the best revenge is to
prove them wrong.
–Zayn Malik –
Be who you are and say what you feel
because those who mind don’t matter and
those who matter don’t mind.
– Dr. Seuss –
The best hard–working person deserves the best hard–won
achievement as it is hard–earned.
viii
In Dedication to
My Beloved Parents, Who Always Help Me Be What I Am
Under Any Circumstances,
My Lovely Brother and Sister, Who Always Support Me
All the Way,
ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The process of writing this undergraduate thesis would not have met its
final completion without the involvement of others. Accordingly, my uttermost
gratitude is addressed to Allah the Almighty for the abundant blessings so as to
make this thesis possible.
I am extremely indebted to Johannes Harris Hermansyah Setiajid, S.S.,
M.Hum. whom I am proud to call him my advisor. Under his supportive guidance,
encouragement on daily basis from the start, and demands for excellence, I am
able to finish conducting this research. I owe earnest thanks to Dr. Francis Borgias
Alip, M.Pd., M.A., whose constructive criticism and advice perfect this work.
My immense thanks go to Sanata Dharma University for giving me the
scholarship during my pursuit of S.S. degree. Furthermore, it is my fortune to
appreciate and acknowledge the tremendous help and support of my never-ending
friends,
i.e.
Aprilia Devitasari, Apryanti Madah Munthe, Desty Anistya, Ni Putu
Vitria Arizona, Pradina Fitryannisa, Sitoresmi Kriswardani, Rany Widiyasmoro
Putri, and Cicilia Dian Oktavia.
At this moment of accomplishment, my everlasting thanks are expressed
to Dad, Mom, Grandpas, Grandmas, Rini Susanti, Nazri bin Omar, Rayana
Fitriawan, Rekyan Dewi Fortuna, and Novrizal Zuhri Pramudya whose affection,
generosity, encouragement, and sacrifice truly motivate me. Finally, I convey my
special thanks to Pramesthi Dewi Kusumaningrum and Rima Rizka Utami for
their great contributions to this study.
x
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE
... ii
APPROVAL PAGE
... iii
ACCEPTANCE PAGE
... iv
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY
... v
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI
KARYA ILMIAH
... vi
MOTTO PAGE
... vii
DEDICATION PAGE
... viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
... ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
... x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
... xii
ABSTRACT
... xiii
ABSTRAK
... xiv
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
... 1
A. Background of the Study ... 1
B. Problem Formulation ... 4
C. Objectives of the Study ... 4
D. Definition of Terms ... 4
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE
... 7
A. Review of Related Studies ... 7
B. Review of Related Theories ... 15
1. Translation ... 15
2. Translation Process ... 17
3. Think-Aloud Protocol ... 19
4. Screen Recording ... 20
5. Translation Problem ... 21
a. Linguistic Problems ... 22
b. Textual Problems ... 23
c. Extralinguistic Problems ... 23
d. Problems of Intentionality ... 23
e. Problems Relating to the Translation Brief and/or
the Target-Text Reader ... 23
6. Problem Indicators ... 24
a. Primary Problem Indicators ... 24
b. Secondary Problem Indicators ... 24
C. Theoretical Framework ... 25
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY
... 26
A. Areas of Research ... 26
B. Object of the Study ... 27
C. Method of the Study ... 27
D. Research Procedure ... 28
xi
a. Objective Data ... 28
b. Genetive Data ... 29
2. Data Collection ... 29
3. Population and Sample ... 32
4. Data Analysis ... 32
CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
... 35
A. The Translation Problems Encountered in Translating
the Literary Text ... 35
B. The Process of Giving the Solutions to the Translation
Problems Encountered in Translating the Literary Text ... 55
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION
... 87
A. Conclusion ... 87
B. Suggestion ... 88
BIBLIOGRAPHY
... 89
APPENDICES
... 91
Appendix 1:
The S1’s Translation for the Literary Text ... 91
Appendix 2:
The S2’s Translation for the Literary Text ... 92
Appendix 3:
The Transcript of S1’s Process in
Translating the Literary Text (LTI) ... 94
xii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
The Languages
SL
: Source Language
TL
: Target Language
The Methods
TAP
: Think-Aloud Protocol
SRM
: Screen Recording Method
The Stages in Translation Processes
A
: Analysis Stage
S
: Synthesis Stage
R
: Revision Stage
The Subjects
S1
: First Subject
S2
: Second Subject
The Texts
ST
: Source Text
TT
: Target Text
LT
: Literary Text
The Transcripts
LTI
: The Transcript of the First Subject’s Process in Translating the
Literary Text
xiii
ABSTRACT
ADHITAMA, JULYAN.
The Problems and Solutions in Translating a
Literary Text: Tracing the Translation Process Using Think-aloud Protocol
and Screen Recording Method. Yogyakarta: Department of English Letters,
Faculty of Letters, Sanata Dharma University, 2017.
A translation process is all the things that transpire from the outset a
translator commences rendering a source text until he puts an end to a target text.
By monitoring the translation process, an observer is able to have better
comprehension of the translator’s mental process at the time when he translates
the text. When the translation process is going on, the translator may have
problems and solutions to them. Thus, this study focuses on the observation of the
translation process done by subjects in which it emphasizes their ways to solve the
problems they might undergo in undertaking a written translation task.
There are two objectives to achieve under close scrutiny in this study.
The first is to conscientiously observe the translation problems encountered in
translating the literary text. The second is to thoroughly explore the process of
giving the solutions to the translation problems encountered in translating the
literary text. Two subjects are assigned to perform the experiment (to translate the
literary text) and verbalize everything they have in mind when translating.
This study applies observational, explicatory, and library research. The
observational as well as explicatory research is conducted by employing the
think-aloud protocol and screen recording method, while the library research is
conducted by obtaining theories from various books and journals. Such research
methods are applied for scrutiny’s sake of data taken from the transcripts of the
recordings.
xiv
ABSTRAK
ADHITAMA, JULYAN.
The Problems and Solutions in Translating a
Literary Text: Tracing the Translation Process Using Think-aloud Protocol
and Screen Recording Method. Yogyakarta: Program Studi Sastra Inggris,
Fakultas Sastra, Universitas Sanata Dharma, 2017.
Proses penerjemahan adalah semua hal yang terjadi dari awal penerjemah
mulai mengalihbahasakan teks sumber sampai dia mengakhiri teks sasaran.
Dengan memantau proses penerjemahan, pengamat dapat memiliki pemahaman
yang lebih baik pada proses mental penerjemah ketika dia menerjemahkan teks.
Ketika penerjemahan sedang berlangsung, penerjemah mungkin memiliki masalah
dan solusi untuk menyelesaikannya. Oleh karena itu, penelitian ini berfokus pada
pengamatan proses penerjemahan yang dilakukan oleh para subjek. Penekanan
penelitian ini terletak pada cara para subjek menyelesaikan masalah yang dihadapi
ketika menerjemahkan teks secara tertulis.
Dua rumusan masalah telah diselesaikan di bawah penelitian cermat
dalam studi
ini.
Pertama, peneliti dengan cermat
mengamati masalah
penerjemahan yang dihadapi ketika mengalihbahasakan teks sastra. Kedua,
peneliti dengan cermat mempelajari proses pemberian solusi kepada masalah
penerjemahan yang dihadapi ketika mengalihbahasakan teks sastra. Peneliti
meminta kedua subjek untuk menerjemahkan teks sastra dan mengatakan segala
yang ada dalam pikiran mereka saat menerjemahkan.
Studi ini menerapkan penelitian observasi, explicatory, dan studi pustaka.
Penelitian observasi dan explicatory
dilakukan dengan menerapkan metode
think-aloud protocol
dan
screen recording. Sementara itu, penelitian studi pustaka
dilakukan dengan mengumpulkan teori-teori dari berbagai buku dan jurnal.
Metode penelitian tersebut diterapkan demi analisis data yang diperoleh dari
transkrip rekaman.
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This chapter encompasses four parts. The first part is the background of
the study which describes the topic, the rationale behind choosing the topic, and
the current information surrounding the topic. The second part is the problem
formulation that consists of research questions to convey the research problems
shown in the title of this study. The third part is the objectives of the study which
state the function of this study and are in accordance with the research questions.
The final part is the definition of terms that provides explanations of essential
terms related to the topic of this study.
A. Background of the Study
In bilingual communication, translators are the main actors who bridge
the communication. The error of apprehending a source language (SL) message
and then converting it into a target language (TL) is capable of damaging the
communication. Translators must have sufficient competence to be able to
transform the SL into the TL properly.
As a means of communication, translation plays a genuinely significant
role in transferring the notion of human being. From time to time, translation has
been consistently developed and done in a variety of products, i.e.
written, spoken,
printed, published, on a screen,
etc.
Therefore, the world of translation has been
Translation is a process of transferring a written or spoken message from
the SL into the TL by a translator. Brislin defines translation as
the general term referring to the transfer of thoughts and ideas from one
language (source) to another (target), whether the languages are in
written or oral form; whether the languages have established
orthographies or do not have such standardization or whether one or both
languages is based on signs, as with sign languages of the deaf (1976: 1).
In the definition above, Brislin provides extensive limits on the term of translation
involving the transfer of thoughts or ideas. Moreover, it implies that translators
are behind the translation products.
Translation visibility is seen as a simple activity, which is to convert one
language (the SL) into another language (the TL). What actually happens,
however, is a complex cognitive process. In a translation process, translators
might find a variety of issues in relation to the pursuit of equivalent meaning in
the TL. Furthermore, translators are required to be able to take appropriate
decisions in order to avoid a distortion of the extensive meaning. Therefore, so
significant is the role of translators in the bilingual communication that it demands
reconstruction methods of the translation process so as to do recommendations at
certain stages that need further improvement. One of the methods for
reconstructing the translation process is think-aloud protocol (TAP). TAP is an
introspective method which requires subjects to verbalize the cognitive process
while they are translating.
When translators render a certain text, there must be such problems that
arise whether in the middle of the process of translating it or thereafter. According
difference of geography, customs, beliefs, worldview, and various other factors is
a problem related to the cultural differences (1984: 163). In addition, because of
different backgrounds and experiences, translators might apply different tactics
even to cope with similar problems. Consequently, how different people with
different backgrounds translate a text is a remarkably fascinating topic to study.
This study focuses on the observation of the translation process done by
subjects in which it emphasizes their ways to solve the problems they might
undergo in undertaking a written translation task. The ways might include
decision-making towards particular translation strategies applied during the
translation process. Such an activity is recorded using a screen recording method
(SRM),
for later being transcribed and scrutinized in depth to look for which stage
where a discrepancy between the SL and TL happens.
The subjects of this study are an English Letters student of semester
seven from Sanata Dharma University and an English Education student of
semester seven from Yogyakarta State University. They are assigned to translate a
text type,
i.e.
a literary text. Each of them has some experience of translating
literary texts. This research attempts to observe the dissimilarities in their
processes of translating the text caused by different academic, cultural, or other
backgrounds.
This research is worth studying as readers can observe translation
problems that translators might encounter during the translation process. In
addition, translators can comprehend and solve the translation problems. Then,
B. Problem Formulation
In order to limit the scope of the study and obtain deeper scrutiny, the
problems for this topic are formulated as follows.
1.
What translation problems are encountered in translating the literary text?
2.
What are the solutions to the translation problems encountered in translating
the literary text?
C. Objectives of the Study
There are two objectives to achieve under discussion in this study. The
first objective aims to conscientiously observe the translation problems which are
encountered when the subjects translate the literary text. The second objective
aims to thoroughly explore the process of giving the solutions to the translation
problems that are encountered when the subjects translate the literary text. Those
two activities are traced down by employing the TAP and SRM.
D. Definition of Terms
In order to avoid misunderstanding of the terminologies used in this
study, the researcher provides the definitions of terms as follows.
Translation problem
as stated by Bell is the circumstance happening
during the translation process, when the translator scrutinizes the source text (ST)
or produces the target text (TT), that makes the SL message cannot be
problem is something that causes a translator to encounter difficulties during
translating a text.
Literary text
.
As mentioned by
Cambridge Advanced Learner’s
Dictionary, literary as an adjective means “connected with literature” (2008: 837)
and text as a noun means “the written words in a book, magazine, etc., not the
pictures” (2008: 1503). In brief, a literary text means any written materials related
to literature, such as prose, poetry, or plays.
Translation process
as defined by Hansen is all doings occurring when
the translator begins translating the ST until finishing the TT, and it involves
movements, keystrokes, dictionaries as well as Internet uses, thinking processes,
problem-solving, and correction-making (2003: 26). In short, a translation process
is a complex series of actions covering all activities and requirements that the
translator must undertake to transform the ST to the TT.
Think-aloud protocol
, as opined by Alvstad, Hild, and Tiselius, is “a
method originally borrowed from cognitive psychology (Ericsson and Simon,
1984). It is an introspective method in which subjects are expected to verbalize
their mental processes while they perform a task” (2011: 1). In other words, TAP
is a type of protocol employed to collect data in usability testing in psychology or
a range of social sciences,
i.e.
translation research, process tracing,
decision-making, etc.
involving subjects’ verbalizations as they undertake a specified task.
Screen recording
as explained by Hansen is a method employing
software to record all alterations on the computer screen,
i.e.
cursor movements,
and even length of phases and pauses, during the subjects’ writing processes
(2013: 91-92). To put it differently, screen recording is a technique that enables
the user to capture any area of the computer screen including all activities on it
7
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This chapter embodies three main parts, namely the review of related
studies, review of related theories, and theoretical framework. The review of
related studies is the part discussing other related studies on the same topics
formerly done by other researchers. The review of related theories is the part
elaborating the related and relevant theories applied in this study. The theoretical
framework is the part stating the contribution of the theories and reviews in
solving the problems of the study.
A. Review of Related Studies
The researcher reviews three related studies on the discussion of
translation process, TAP, and SRM in order to support this study. The first related
study is the undergraduate thesis that belongs to Fransiska’s “Translation Problem
Solving for Informativeness: Tracing the Translation Process Using Think-Aloud
Protocols and Screen Recording Methods”. The second related study is the
research paper which is from Tirkkonen-Condit’s “Uncertainty in Translation
Processes”. The last related study is the research paper that is taken from
Jääskeläinen’s “Focus on Methodology in Think-aloud Studies on Translating”.
At the end of the review, the researcher states how this current study is similar to
and different from the studies the researcher reviews here. The researcher also
1.
Fransiska’s “Translation Problem Solving for Informativeness: Tracing
the Translation Process Using Think-Aloud Protocols and Screen
Recording Methods”
Fransiska’s undergraduate thesis focuses on the ways different people
solve problems in performing written translation tasks. She emphasizes the focus
on the translation strategies they apply and the consequences of applying certain
strategies seen from the translation informativeness. Therefore, she examines the
translation in both processes and products.
Fransiska has three research objectives. First, she aims to identify the
translation problems that the subjects encounter in translating the religious and
academic texts. Second, she intends to explore the problem-solving process when
the subjects translate the religious and academic texts. The last, she aims at rating
the informativeness of each translation using Carroll’s scale as the final attempt to
complete her experiment. Furthermore, in conducting the research, she applies
think-aloud protocols and screen recording methods to trace down the translation
process of each text.
The subjects of her observation are two students having different
religious backgrounds,
i.e.
Islam and Christianity. Each subject is requested to
translate a Christian text and an academic text. At the end of the observation, she
finds out that the subjects have different performances in translating the two types
of texts. They use different translation strategies in an attempt to solve the
problems the subjects encounter during the process of translating both texts. At
higher score is obtained by the Moslem student although the Catholic student is
better in translating the Christian text. It is implied that the backgrounds of
religion, academy, knowledge, intelligence, and socio-culture can influence the
way the subjects translate each text type.
The focus of the current study is somewhat different from Fransiska’s.
This current study focuses on the translation process of literary text as the object
of the study, while she focuses on not only the translation processes of religious
and academic texts but also the translation strategies and informativeness.
Moreover, the current study uses different subjects from Fransiska’s in which the
subjects of this study are a student of semester seven of English Letters
Department from Sanata Dharma University and a student of semester seven of
English Education Department from Yogyakarta State University, while the
subjects of Fransiska’s study are two English Letters students of semester eight
from Sanata Dharma University. Furthermore, in performing the experiment,
Fransiska allows the subjects to employ a translation machine in order to help
them translate the texts, but the current researcher does not.
Other than differences, Fransiska’s study and the current study have
several similarities in which they can support each other. The similarity lies on the
methods applied,
i.e.
TAP and SRM, in order to observe the processes of both
subjects in translating the text. The theories of TAP and SRM give the knowledge
of the way to apply these methods to gather the data for the analysis to answer the
formulation of the first and second problems. Moreover, the current researcher
and the problem indicators proposed by Krings just the same as what Fransiska,
the previous researcher, uses.
2.
Tirkkonen-Condit’s “Uncertainty in Translation Processes”
Tirkkonen-Condit’s research paper purposes are to show how uncertainty
manifests itself in translation processes and to argue that translators might in fact
have identifiable patterns of uncertainty management. In order to achieve the
goals of the research, she undergoes a set of procedures,
i.e.
(1) to identify
particular processing phenomena in the six translators’ protocols as well as the
uncertainty phenomena which seem to appear in connection with the processing
phenomena, (2) to describe how uncertainty is attached to the identified
processing phenomena, and (3) to sketch translator profiles designed to reveal
individual and shared patterns of uncertainty management.
Such research is conducted based on the previous research on translation
processes recommending that proficiency in translation encompasses tolerance of
ambiguity and uncertainty. Meanwhile, Tirkkonen-Condit argues that tolerance of
ambiguity and uncertainty is needed in translation for reconciling the optimal with
what is feasible. It is due to the fact that, theoretically, the optimal translation is
“seldom feasible within the physical confines of everyday translation
assignments” (Tirkkonen-Condit, 2000: 123). Additionally, she claims that the
capability to cope with such ambiguity and uncertainty is needed to be a proficient
translator.
Tirkkonen-Condit’s analysis of processing and uncertainty has the aim of
instances which account for the ultimate TT generation and how uncertainty
phenomena are attached to these instances. In doing so, she employs six
translators’ protocols taken from twenty TAPs originating from four experiments
conducted by Tirkkonen-Condit, Jääskeläinen, and P
ö
ntinen and Romanov at
Savonlinna in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s in which she confines her analysis
to protocols that represent the high-quality professional performance. Two of
these translators render a text from Finnish into English, whereas four other
translators render from English into Finnish.
After achieving the aims of the study, Tirkkonen-Condit concludes that
translators tend to produce tentative solutions throughout translation processes.
The patterns of their uncertainty management, from all of the six protocols, are
similar, which are “to ponder on each tentative solution in turn; to produce
justifications or endorsements; to subject them to audition; or to postpone them”
(Tirkkonen-Condit, 2000: 141). The things that make their patterns dissimilar are
their final decisions to select one or other solutions. Moreover, Tirkkonen-Condit
explains that
the mere fact that a translator is prepared to postpone a solution or to
produce several tentative solutions without endorsing any one of them as
a final solution shows that he or she can tolerate a situation in which a
decision is pending for the time being. Similarly, when a translator
verbalises ignorance or uncertainty in response to a problem situation,
this verbalisation serves as a marker of a processing phenomenon (
i.e.
problem) and as a marker of uncertainty (2000: 141).
Tirkkonen-Condit’s study contributes to the current study by supplying
essential evidence that translators indicate their uncertainties in performing
her analysis of specific processing occurrences in the six translators’ protocols as
well as the uncertainty occurrences and her analysis of descriptions of how
uncertainty is attached to the identified processing occurrences. The first
difference lies on the subjects of the study. The subjects of Tirkkonen-Condit’s
study are professional translators. However, the subjects of the current study are
university students. The second difference lies on the methods used to gather the
data. The researcher of the present study applies not only the TAP but also SRM.
Tirkkonen-Condit, on the other hand, only employs the TAP.
3.
Jääskeläinen’s “Focus on Methodology in Think-aloud Studies on
Translating”
Jääskeläinen states “the fact that thinking aloud has been applied
successfully to elicit data on such tasks is not in itself a guarantee of similar
applicability to research on translating” (2000: 71). Therefore, she discusses some
examples of the types of methodological questions on which TAP research on
translating should focus. It is because of the fact that TAP studies into translating
“have borrowed their data elicitation method (
i.e.
thinking aloud) from cognitive
psychology where it has been used to study various problem-solving and
decision-making processes” (2000: 71).
The foremost concern of Jääskeläinen’s research paper is that
experimentation in translation studies including her own research seems to “suffer
from a lack of relevant methodological knowledge about experimental research”
(2000: 71). She claims that the rationale behind this concern is thus
languages, and cultures, it is unnecessary to know how to study the human mind
at work. One essential task is to identify relevant variables in translator behavior.
Jääskeläinen mentions that “although I am arguing for more experimental
rigour in TAP studies on translating, I am also advocating caution and moderation
in doing that” (2000: 72). Accordingly, she takes up two problems in relation to
research methodology into translation processes by means of thinking aloud. In
the first place, she elaborates the significance of pre-experimental testing of
subjects. In doing the pre-experimental testing, four professional translators are
assigned to perform a translation task. Three of them work as freelance
translators, while one of them works as a business correspondent at a large
Finnish company. In the second place, she explains the potential interference
effects of thinking aloud on the task of translating. In order to attain the potential
interference effects, Jääskeläinen compares the eight translations produced in her
think-aloud experiment with eight translations of the same text produced by
people who are not asked to think aloud while translating.
Corresponding to the first problem, Jääskeläinen’s findings reveal that
there are differences in the subjects’ use of knowledge and their attitude towards
the task at hand, but in the absence of more detailed background information
about the subjects, the explanations remain at the level of speculation.
In conclusion, in accordance with the above quotation, if the researcher as the
observer lacks these types of information about the subjects who participate in
experimental translating situations, it is very difficult to draw reliable conclusions
from TAP studies on translating.
As for the second problem, Jääskeläinen is able to carry out the
comprehensive analysis of the formal correspondence degree in that her
experiment deals with a complete text, not just one sentence. Firstly, she compares
the syntactic structure of the ST with its sixteen translations to see how the
translations closely follow the ST structure in terms of sentence boundaries as
well as within-sentence order of presenting information. Secondly, she analyzes
the translations in terms of formal correspondence at the lexical level,
i.e.
she
counts instances which indicate clear deviations from formal correspondence,
such as omissions, additions, and class-shifts. In summary, even though there is
little evidence of systematic differences between the translations produced with or
without the need to verbalize at the same time, it is too early to draw the
conclusion that no interference exists.
Similar to Jääskeläinen’s interest, this present study, which is also
experimental research, employs the TAP to collect the data as well as to study
problem-solving and decision-making in translation processes. Furthermore, it is
very helpful in the fact that Jääskeläinen not only provides some of the
methodological problems involved in TAP studies on translating but also
recommends some techniques to improve the situation. It is essential to design a
validity and reliability of different data elicitation methods in process-oriented
translation studies. Nevertheless, in comparison to the method of monitoring the
translation processes without much less impact on the subjects’ usual behavior in
performing a translation task, the present study and Jääskeläinen’s study differ
considerably. The researcher of the present study explicitly mentions the use of
SRM to record the subjects’ writing processes when they are undertaking a
specified translation task, but Jääskeläinen does not mention any instrument usage
to monitor the subjects’ writing processes. Moreover, in implementing the
experiments, four professional translators are assigned by Jääskeläinen to perform
a specified translation task, whereas two university students are assigned by the
researcher of the present study to undertake a specified translation task.
Based on all of the studies reviewed above, the stance of this study is to
improve the reviewed studies by employing the same methods,
i.e.
TAP and SRM
in a different text, which is a literary text. By portraying the translation process of
each subject traced by the TAP and SRM, this study affirms the significance of
TAP and SRM in revealing the subjects’ problem-solving and decision-making
during the process of translating the literary text.
B. Review of Related Theories
1.
Translation
Catford states that translation is “a process of substituting a text from an
SL into a TL” (1965: 20). It means that translation is a substituting operation done
just a process of replacing one textual language with another. There are two
different names between the language that is translated and the language that
becomes the result after the first language is translated. The first one is the SL and
the second one is the TL.
According to Savory (1968), translation is “made possible by an
equivalent of thought that lies behind its different verbal expressions” (cited in
Suryawinata and Hariyanto, 2003: 12). He obviously states that the equivalent
thing is the thought. He, however, does not explain any further regarding
operational matters or related processes.
There is another statement to support Savory’s that comes from Nida and
Taber (1982) in which translation “consists of reproducing in the receptor
language the closest natural equivalent of the SL message, first in terms of
meaning and secondly in terms of style” (quoted in Suryawinata and Hariyanto,
2003: 12). From their above statement, it clearly means that they do not
problematize the involved languages in translation, but they are more attentive to
the way of translation working, which is to look for the closest natural equivalent
so as to successfully transfer the SL message to the TL.
In conclusion, translation can be defined as the process of transferring a
written or spoken message from the SL into the TL by a translator. It indicates
that the translator needs to concern with not only the SL but also the TL. The
difference can be in cultures or customs as Hatim and Munday mention about a
translator’s course of action in replacing a language from the ST into another
2.
Translation Process
Hansen states that a translation process is
everything that happens from the moment the translator starts working
on the ST until he finishes the TT. It is all encompassing, from every
pencil movement and keystroke, to dictionary use, the use of the internet
and the entire thought process that is involved in solving a problem or
making a correction ± in short everything a translator must do to
transform the ST to the TT (2003: 26).
In other words, a translation process is a complex series of actions that entangles
with all the things occurring while a translator is undertaking a translation task.
According to Malmkjær, translation process is a cognitive process in
translation studies that can be
used to designate a variety of phenomena, from the cognitive processes
activated during translating, both conscious and unconscious, to the more
“physical” process which begins when a client contacts a translation
bureau and ends when that person declares satisfaction with the product
produced as the final result of the initial inquiry (excerpted in
Tirkkonen-Condit and Jääskeläinen, 2000: 163).
To put it differently, if a translation process means the process that commences
when a language student, for instance, meets with a sentence in English and ends
when that student has produced what readers consider a corresponding sentence in
Indonesian, that sentence in Indonesian is a translation. Meanwhile, if a
translation process is defined as the process that starts with the client’s request and
ends with a satisfied customer, no Indonesian sentence produced in the manner
just described can be considered a translation and the student’s effort will hardly
be recognized as translating.
Furthermore, Albir and Alves (quoted in Munday, 2009: 62-63) mention
a. the existence of basic stages related to understanding and re-expression,
b. the need to use and integrate internal (cognitive) and external resources,
c. the role of memory and information storage,
d. the dynamic and interactive nature of the process, which encompasses
linguistic as well as non-linguistic elements,
e. the non-linear nature of the process,
f. the existence of automatic and non-automatic,
g. the role of retrieval, problem-solving, decision-making and the use of
translation-specific strategies in the unfolding and management of the process,
h. the existence of specific characteristics, depending on the type of translation.
To sum up, a translation process can be defined as a complex cognitive process
which has an interactive and non-linear nature, encompasses controlled and
uncontrolled processes, and requires processes of problem-solving,
decision-making, and the use of strategies.
In addition, Bell (2001: 187) remarks that there are three stages in the
translation process,
i.e.
“analysis, synthesis, and revision”. Analysis is the stage
when the translator prepares for the material involving reading or listening to the
ST and learning the context. He adds that analysis “requires processing at the
syntactic, semantic and pragmatic levels”. Synthesis is the stage when the
translator produces the TT,
i.e.
written, typed, or spoken, which is based on the
translator’s intention and interpretation of the text and the user’s needs. Revision
translation. This stage is when the translator makes editing or corrections on the
TT to make the final TT fully acceptable to the target readers.
3.
Think-Aloud Protocol
Alvstad, Hild, and Tiselius opine that think-aloud protocol is “a method
originally borrowed from cognitive psychology (Ericsson and Simon, 1984). It is
an introspective method in which subjects are expected to verbalize their mental
processes while they perform a task” (2011: 1). In brief, TAP is one of many
introspective methods in which Jääskeläinen further elaborates that it includes
(traditional) introspection, where the subject of the experiment carries out
a self-analysis of his or her own thought processes, and retrospective
verbal reporting, which takes place after rather than during the
performance of a given task for the experiment. In contrast, thinking
aloud is concurrent (takes place simultaneously with the task
performance) and undirected (subjects are not asked to verbalize specific
information). As a result, TAP data are considered more complete and
more reliable than introspective or retrospective reports: more complete
because there is less likelihood of forgetting or omitting information, and
more reliable because there is less likelihood of distortion (Ericsson and
Simon, 1984). In other words, the method of thinking aloud in data
collection attempts, as far as possible, to elicit unedited data; it is then the
task of the experimenter to investigate whether – and if so which –
regularities appear in the data (2001: 266).
In essence, TAP involves subjects’ thinking aloud as they undertake a set
of specified tasks
.
Therefore, in order to employ this method in the translation
process research, the subjects are essentially asked to verbalize whatever comes
into their minds as they accomplish the translation task. Their verbalizations are
recorded on audio or videotape, which are later on transcribed. The recordings
might include what they are looking at, thinking, doing, and feeling. The written
transcripts of the recordings are then scrutinized to observe what is actually
Hansen recommends that “the observers should be present during the TA
experiments, but they should remain invisible” (2013: 90). To put it differently, he
suggests that, in the process of conducting a research employing the TAP, the
interaction between the subject(s) and observer(s) should be eliminated during the
experiments,
i.e.
while the subjects are undertaking a translation task and
verbalizing their thoughts. Through this technique, the data could not be distorted.
Notwithstanding that Ericsson and Simon mention that “social
verbalizations may be quite different from the sequences of thoughts generated by
subjects themselves while solving problems, performing actions and making
evaluations and decisions” (cited in Hansen, 2013: 90), they argue that, in order to
enhance the verbalization data, the observers may prompt the subjects with
expressions like “keep talking”, “what are you thinking about?”,
etc
. Such
expressions might be uttered whenever the subjects stop talking due to the fact
that these reminders might only have a very small consequence on the data.
To sum up, by conducting this research applying the TAP, it provides the
researcher (as the observer) insight for the subjects’ cognitive processes rather
than only their final products in order to make thought processes as explicit as
possible during the translation task performance.
4.
Screen Recording
Screen recording, or screenshot recording, is a method using software to
record all changes on the computer screen,
i.e.
cursor movements, clicks,
corrections, uses of the Internet and electronic aids such as dictionaries, and even
recording process, the writing processes are shown dynamically on the screen
with the ‘replay function’ (Hansen, 2013: 91-92). Thus, this method has given the
researcher an opportunity to monitor the translation process without much less
impact on the subjects’ usual behavior in performing a translation task.
The qualitative methods of introspection are often combined with screen
recording in order to get the quantitative data about the process since the data
which are registered on a log file can be counted and evaluated (Hansen, 2013:
91). It means that the quantitative data still have to be interpreted. It is, for
instance, possible to register and measure pauses, but determining why the
subjects stop writing and what they are thinking during the pauses, the researcher
as the observer still does not know. Therefore, in order to be able to comprehend
the qualitative data, the researcher has to rely on the subjects’ verbal reports and
subjective interpretations. Nevertheless, these quantitative data are considered as
being more objective.
The name of the instrument that the researcher uses in relation to the
application of SRM is
Blueberry (BB) FlashBack Express Recorder
. It is very
helpful for the researcher to record all activities on the computer screen in a quick
and hassle-free way. For instance, the researcher can capture the subjects’ uses of
the Internet and electronic dictionaries.
5.
Translation Problem
According to Nord, a translation problem is “an objective problem which
every translator (irrespective of his level of competence and of the technical
151). In essence, Nord claims that not all problems a translator encounters in the
translation process can be considered as translation problems.
Bell opines that a translation problem is the circumstance happening
during the translation process, when the translator scrutinizes the ST or produces
the TT, that makes the SL message cannot be transferred extemporaneously into
the TL (2001: 188). In brief, a translation problem is something that causes a
translator to encounter difficulties during translating a text.
A translation problem is seen as
reliable indicators of progress in acquiring translation competence: a
translation problem may appear at any stage of the translation process; it
is observable; and, in solving translation problems, subjects certainly
show their ability to use translation strategies, which is a relevant
element of translation competence (Orozco and Albir, 2002: 380).
In other words, a translation problem can take place at any stage of the translation
process; is an indicator of a subject’s use of translation strategies; and is
observable that when solving translation problems, the subjects combine activities
and link together several activities depending on the particular problem. This
indicates the crucial role of strategic competence in controlling the whole process.
The PACTE (Process in the Acquisition of Translation Competence and
Evaluation) group (2011: 327) elaborates five categories of translation problems.
a.
Linguistic Problems
Linguistic
problems
are
the
lexical
(non-specialized)
and
morphosyntactical problems encountered in performing the translation task, which
b.
Textual Problems
Textual problems are the translation problems relating to the coherence,
cohesion, text type, text genre, style, intertextuality, and differences in the way
texts function in each language. This type of problems may also occur because of
the difficulties of both comprehension and re-expression.
c.
Extralinguistic Problems
Extralinguistic problems are the translation problems which occur
because of cultural differences. The problems in this category can also occur when
the translator is lack of specific field knowledge or cultural and encyclopedic
knowledge. A translation problem can be categorized as an extralinguistic
problem only if the translator has difficulty in comprehending the term in the ST.
Thus, if the translator only has difficulty in finding the exact term for the TT, the
translation problem is still classified as a linguistic problem.
d.
Problems of Intentionality
Problems of intentionality are the translation problems which occur when
the translator has difficulty in understanding the information contained in the ST.
It may happen because the translator cannot comprehend the intertextual
references, speech acts, presuppositions, or implicatures.
e.
Problems Relating to the Translation Brief and/or the Target-Text
Reader
These problems are the translation problems relating to the function of
To conclude, difficulties in translation are “subjective and have to do
with the translator himself and his specific working conditions” (excerpted in
PACTE, 2011: 326). It means that, in line with Nord’s definition, the problems
experienced in the translation process that is caused by the translator’s difficulties
in comprehension and reexpression, such as linguistic problems, textual problems,
problems of intentionality and problems relating to the translation brief and/or the
target-text reader, should not be categorized as translation problems because they
are difficulties in translation. Furthermore, the extralinguistic problems may be
considered as translation problems when they occur because of the cultural
differences and as translation difficulties when they occur due to shortcomings in
the translator’s knowledge of a special concept in a specific field, culture,
etc
.
6.
Problem Indicators
Krings (quoted in Dimitrova, 2005: 156), on the basis of TAP, suggests
problem indicators to recognize the translation problems encountered by each
subject while translating a text,
i.e.
:
a.
Primary Problem Indicators
i.
Explicit or implicit problem identification by the translator
ii.
Use of aids
iii. Leaving a gap in the translated text
b.
Secondary Problem Indicators
i.
Competing tentative translation equivalents
ii.
Changes in the target text
iv. Negative evaluation of the target text
v.
Unfilled pauses longer than 3 seconds
vi. Paralinguistic indicators
vii. The lack of a primary equivalent association
Primary indicators are seen as stronger. As a consequence, the existence
of only one of the indicators can identify a particular segment in the verbalization
made by the subject as the indication that he or she encounters a problem. On the
contrary, secondary indicators are seen as weaker that it needs at least two of them
for the identification of a segment as the indication that a problem occurs.
C. Theoretical Framework
This part is worth explaining in that there are reasons why the theories
are necessary and how they are applied. Thus, the theories of translation and
translation process are required to provide the core comprehension of the
translation notion and everything that is supposed to be observed in the translation
process research. The theories of think-aloud protocol and screen recording
contribute the fundamental apprehension to the mode of the two-method
utilization to elicit data for the analysis to answer the research questions.
In addition to answer the first question, the problem indicators are used
for the classification of some particular segments in the verbalizations as indicating
problems. Finally, the theories and categorization of translation problems are
necessary to identify and classify the translation problems that the subjects
26
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
For the sake of the research accomplishment in a systematic way, the
researcher elaborates a set of procedures throughout this chapter which is divided
into four main points. The first point is the areas of research which briefly
describe the extent of translation conducted by the researcher. The second point is
the object of the study in which the researcher provides the detailed descriptions
of the objects being studied. The third point is the method of the study in which
the researcher explains the analysis steps to answer the problem formulation. The
last point is the research procedure that mentions the types of collected data,
narrates the data collection process, discusses the population and sample
concerning with the research, and describes how the data are analyzed.
A. Areas of Research
The areas of translation research organized by the researcher were
“translation process” by conducting protocol studies and “text analysis and
translation” by dealing with the translation problems found in the translation
products. According to Williams and Chesterman (2002: 25), translation process
research area, especially for protocol studies, was a research in which it sought to
investigate the translation’s internal decision-making process by using think-aloud
methods or retrospective interviews. The TAPs could also be linked to computer
of time in detail. Meanwhile, Williams and Chesterman (2002: 6) explained that
the text analysis and translation research area did not only analyze both texts but
also compared the ST and TT. The first step needed was to analyze the
communicative situation of the translation. It meant that who the target people
were and what function it had should be considered in the research. As a
consequence, comparing the ST and TT based on the translation problems could
be conducted.
B. Object of the Study
The object of this study was the process of two students’ problem-solving
in translating the literary text. The literary text was excerpted from a short story
entitled “A Clean, Well-Lighted Place” by an American author, Ernest
Hemingway, and was first published in 1933.
C. Method of the Study
This study was qualitative and quantitative. The qualitative method was
based on the interpretations of reports from the subjects’ translation task
performances. The reports encompassed the translation problems and personal
involvements of each subject during the translation process. The quantitative
method, on the other hand, was based on and proceed from the researcher’s ideas
about the observed dimensions as well as calculable and measurable categories. It
was used, for instance, to investigate the length of pauses taken or the number of
Thus, the qualitative data should be interpreted and explained, while the
quantitative data should be coded, classified, and counted. This was why, in this
work, the qualitative and quantitative methods were indissociable in that it was
through a combination of both that the researcher intended to reach the objectives.
This study applied observational and explicatory research by employing
the TAP and SRM, and also library research by obtaining theories from various
books and journals. This study explored the techniques of two subjects solving the
problems found in translating the literary text by analyzing every single thing
occurring during the translation process including keystrokes, cursor movements,
clicks, the use of the Internet as well as electronic dictionaries, and thoughts
which are traced down using the TAP and SRM.
The data in this study were primary. In conducting primary research, the
researcher collected original data by running experiments or direct observations
about test subjects. The data for studying the translation process were obtained
from the subjects performing the translation task. Thus, the primary data enabled
the researcher to get as close as possible to what actually happened during the
subjects’ translation process.
D. Research Procedure
1.
Types of Data
a.
Objective Data
The objective data under study were the data used to be the ST. The data
Place”, was written by Ernest Hemingway. It was cited from the book entitled
The
Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway
published by Simon and Schuster
Inc. in 1987.
b.
Genetive Data
The genetive data were the transcripts of the recordings and the translated
text obtained from the translators themselves. In this case, the translators were the
subjects in the experiments. The subjects of this study were an English Letters
student of semester 7 from Sanata Dharma University and an English Education
student of semester 7 from Yogyakarta State University in which they had
different Grade Point Averages (GPAs). The first subject (S1)’s GPA was above
the average, while the second subject (S2)’s was about the average which affirmed
that both subjects had different academic backgrounds. The subjects were
assigned to translate one text as the ST,
i.e.
the literary text. Each of them had
some experience of translating literary texts. The translated text,
i.e.
the TT, was
used as the data to scrutinize the translation problems found in the translation
product.
2.
Data Collection
The seventh semester English Letters student from Sanata Dharma
University and the seventh semester English Education student from Yogyakarta
State University who had taken the translation course class were chosen to be the
subjects of the research in order to elicit the data for scrutinizing the translation
with the SRM. Furthermore, it was done by conducting the systematic data
collection.
The data collection system was arranged as follows. Firstly, the
researcher installed the software called
Blueberry (BB) Flashback Express
Recorder
on the computer used in the experiments in which it recorded all
subjects’ verbalizations with its sound recorder, all activities the subjects were
doing with its webcam recorder, and all changes on the computer screen with its
screen recorder. Secondly, the researcher explained the experiment procedures
and verified that each subject clearly understood what she had to do before
undertaking the translation task. Thirdly, each subject was asked to translate the
text on a computer and, at the same time, to verbalize whatever came to her mind.
Fourthly, during the experiments, the researcher silently sat quite far from the
subjects in order to eliminate any interaction between the subject and the
researcher so that the subjects’ translation process would not be disturbed. Last
but not least, all of the things verbalized by the subjects and all of the changes on
the computer screen were transcribed.
The followings were some essential notes in relation to the above data
collection system. First,
BB Flashback Express Recorder
worked on the
computer’s background so that it did not disturb the subjects’ concentration in that
they did not see the software icon on the screen. In addition, there were also two
electronic dictionaries installed on the computer,
i.e. Cambridge Advanced
Learner’s Dictionary Third Edition (CALD3)
and
Kamus 2.04 (Kamus2)
, which
number consisted of one, two, three, or four sentence(s). Thirdly, the researcher
sometimes reminded the subjects to keep talking when they had stopped talking
for a long time. This was done to enhance the verbalization data. Last but not
least, after the experiments, the results of the recording processes, as an example,
were transcribed as follows.
Time
(Second) Audio
Video Stage
(Code) Computer Screen Webcam
1 Oh I see A1/1
1 Still looking
at the screen
A1/2
9 It was late and every one had left the café except an old man who sat in the shadow the leaves of the tree made against the electric light.
A1/3
3 Still looking
at the screen
A1/4
1 It was late A1/5
8 It Opening CALD3 A1/6
Searching for the meaning of “it” (CALD3shows it: pronoun – (as subject or object) the thing, animal or situation which has already been mentioned)
1 Going back to the
worksheet
A1/7
4 SUDAH TERLAMBAT Typing “Sudah terlambat”
S1/1
6 Still looking
at the screen
A1/8
4 It was late Deleting “Sudah terlambat”
S1/2
11 HARI SUDAH LARUT DAN SETIAP ORANG TELAH
MENINGGALKAN
Typing “Hari sudah larut dan setiap orang telah meninggalkan”
S1/3
Some parts of this transcript are cut.
---2
Moving to number 1 R1/112
It was late and every one had left the café except an old man who sat in the shadow… in the shadow the leaves of the tree made against the electric light.in which,
for the ‘audio’ column:
words in bold
: words from the ST and TT
WORDS IN UPPERCASE LETTERS
: words for the TT
underlined words
: words from the ST or for the TT
which are read/said wrong
italicized words
: words which are read/said unclearly
for the ‘stage (code)’ column:
A1/1
: The first datum for the subject’s analysis stage of no. 1
A1/2
: The second datum for the subject’s analysis stage of no. 1, and so on
S1/1
: The first datum for the subject’s synthesis stage of no. 1
S1/2
: The second datum for the subject’s synthesis stage of no. 1, and so on
R1/1
: The first datum for the subject’s revision stage of no. 1
R1/2
: The second datum for the subject’s revision stage of no. 1, and so on
3.
Population and Sam
