i
THE ACCEPTABILITY OF INDONESIAN
–
ENGLISH
TRANSLATION OF THE SCENE PLAQUES IN FORT
VREDEBURG MUSEUM BASED ON LARSON’S THEORY
A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education
By
Ria Apriani Kusumastuti Student Number: 121214109
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA
vi ABSTRACT
Kusumastuti, Ria Apriani (2017). The Acceptability of Indonesian – English Translation of the Scene Plaques in Fort Vredeburg Museum Based on Larson’s Theory. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University
Museum is a favorite destination for foreigners to know about country they are visiting. Museum is also important for people who are interested in history to broaden their knowledge. Therefore, it is important to introduce the museum to public and the museum management are expected to make the information written in the museum in bilingual language to attract not only local people but also foreigners. One example which is written in bilingual is the scene plaques in Fort Vredeburg Museum. This research is conducted to analyze the acceptability of the English translation of the plaques in Fort Vredeburg Museum. The aim of this research is to answer a question: How is the acceptability of the scene plaques in Fort Vredeburg Museum based on Larson’s theory?
This research is a qualitative research and the method is document analysis. The data were obtained from Diorama I and ten data were used in this research. The data were analyzed using meaning-based translation proposed by Larson (1984). There were six ways to test the translation, namely comparison with the source language, back-translation, comprehension checks, naturalness and readability testing, and consistency checks. Larson (1984) stated that a good translation is a translation which is clear, natural and accurate, and since the aim of the research was to find the acceptability of the English translation of the plaques, only three steps were taken. The three steps were clarity checking, naturalness checking, and accuracy checking. There were five categories for the translation, namely excellent, very good, good, sufficient, and poor.
The findings of the research showed that average score for the translation was 9.5 out of 12 and it was in the very good category. Very good category means that most of the translations did not have distortion of meaning and few vocabulary mistakes. Meanwhile, only one translation was in the sufficient category. Sufficient means awkward translation and wrong use of idiomatic expression and grammar. In clarity and naturalness, some translations are not understandable and use word-for-word translation. In terms of accuracy, most of the translations give additional information that make the TL readers understand more about SL terms, yet some revisions are needed to make the translation better.
vii ABSTRAK
Kusumastuti, Ria Apriani (2017). The Acceptability of Indonesian – English Translation of the Scene Plaques in Fort Vredeburg Museum Based on Larson’s Theory. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University
Museum adalah tujuan favorit bagi orang-orang asing untuk lebih mengetahui mengenai negara yang mereka kunjungi. Museum juga penting bagi orang-orang yang tertarik mempelajari sejarah untuk memperluas wawasan. Maka dari itu, sangatlah penting untuk mengenalkan museum dan pengelola museum diharapkan untuk menyediakan informasi dalam dwibahasa untuk lebih menarik minat pengunjung lokal maupun turis pendatang. Salah satu contoh yang tertulis dalam dwibahasa adalah deskripsi adegan di Museum Vredeburg. Penelitian berikut bertujuan untuk meneliti keberterimaan terjemahan Bahasa inggris dalam deskripsi adegan di Museum Benteng Vredeburg. Tujuan dari penilitian berikut adalah untuk menjawab pertanyaan: Bagaimanakah keberterimaan terjemahan Bahasa Indonesia-Bahasa Inggris dalam deskripsi adegan di Museum Benteng Vredeburg menurut teori terjemahan berdasarkan makna menggunakan teori Larson?
Berikut adalah penelitian kualitatif dan menggunakan metode analisa dokumen. Data diambil dari Diorama I dan ada 10 data yang digunakan. Data tersebut kemudian diteliti menggunakan teori terjemahan berdasarkan makna menurut Larson (1984). Ada enam cara untuk menguji terjemahan, yaitu perbandingan dengan teks bahasa sumber, terjemahan balik, tes pemahaman, tes kewajaran dan tes keterbacaan, serta tes konsistensi. Larson (1984) menyatakan bahwa terjemahan yang baik adalah terjemahan yang jelas, wajar, serta tepat, dan karena tujuan dari penelitian berikut adalah untuk mengetahui keberterimaan terjemahan Bahasa Inggris, maka hanya tiga cara yang digunakan. Tiga cara tersebut adalah tes pemahaman, tes kewajaran, dan tes ketepatan. Ada lima kategori kualitas terjemahan, yaitu hampir sempurna, sangat bagus, baik, cukup, dan buruk.
Hasil dari penelitian menunjukkan bahwa nilai rata-rata dari seluruh terjemahan adalah 9,5 dari total 12 yang menunjukkan bahwa terjemahan tersebut sangat bagus. Terjemahan yang sangat bagus ditunjukkan dengan sedikitnya perbedaan makna dan kesalahan kosa kata. Sementara itu, hanya ada satu teks terjemahan yang masuk dalam kategori cukup. Terjemahan yang berkategori cukup bermakna adanya terjemahan yang kaku dan kesalahan penggunaan idiom dan tata bahasa. Dalam pemahaman dan kewajaran, beberapa terjemahan tidak dapat dipahami dan diterjemahkan kata per kata. Dalam ketepatan, sebagian besar terjemahan menberikan informasi tambahan yang membuat target pembaca memahami istilah dari bahasa sumber. Meskipun demikian, beberapa perbaikan diperlukan untuk membuat terjemahan menjadi lebih baik.
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I thank Allah SWT for the endless blessings during the writing
of my undergraduate thesis. Without Him, I could not carry the weight of the
heavy world.
My gratitude goes to my thesis advisor, Carla Sih Prabandari, S.Pd.,
M.Hum., who always brightens me with ideas and advises; Yohana Veniranda, M.Hum, M.A., Ph.D. and Laurentia Sumarni, S.Pd., M.Trans.St., who had given me endless support and motivation in writing a thesis on translation, also
ideas and feedback on my thesis. I would like to thank all lecturers of the English
Language Education Study Program for the knowledge during my study period in
Sanata Dharma University, also to the Faculty of Teachers Training and
Education for helping me during my study period. I also thank Fort Vredeburg
Museum for the permission to take pictures related to this research.
My special thanks go to my beloved parents; Joko Riyanto and Suharsi
for caring, loving, praying and supporting. In addition, I also thank my sisters and
brother; Reni Yuliana Kusuma Astuti, Rina Febriani Puspitasari, Yoga
Agung Kurniawan, and also my beloved nieces; Leandra Akila Larasati, Kiandra Vania Nareswari, Keisya Adeliana Az-Zahra for the happiness, joy, and love they bring to me.
Lastly, I also thank my friends in the English Language Education Study
Program, especially from batch 2012 for their support during my study period.
x
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TITLE PAGE ... i
APPROVAL PAGES ... ii
STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ... iv
PERNYATAAN PERETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ... v
ABSTRACT ... vi
ABSTRACT ... vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... x
LIST OF TABLES ... xiii
LIST OF APPENDICES ... xiv
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ... 1
A. Research Background... 1
B. Research Problem... 4
C. Problem Limitation ... 4
D. Research Objectives ... 5
E. Research Benefits ... 5
1. Future Researcher... 5
2. Fort Vredeburg Museum ... 5
3. Translator ... 5
4. Reader ... 6
F. Definition of Terms ... 6
1. Translation Acceptability ... 6
2. The Scene Plaques... 6
CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ... 8
A. Theoretical Description ... 8
1. Review on Related Study ... 8
2. Translation... 10
xi
b. Translation Procedures ... 12
1. Preparation ... 12
2. Analysis ... 13
3. Transfer ... 13
4. Initial Draft ... 13
5. Reworking the initial draft ... 13
6. Testing the translation ... 14
7. Preparing the manuscript for the publisher ... 14
c. Meaning-based Translation ... 15
d. Translation Testing... 16
1. Comparison with the source language ... 16
2. Back-translation ... 17
3. Comprehension tests ... 17
4. Naturalness tests ... 17
5. Readability tests ... 18
6. Consistency checks ... 18
7. Using the testing results ... 18
e. Acceptable Translation ... 18
B.
Theoretical Framework ... 22CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 24
A. Research Method ... 25
B. Research Setting... 25
C. Research Subject ... 25
D. Instruments and Data Gathering Technique ... 25
1. Human ... 26
2. Documents ... 26
3. Rubric ... 26
E. Data Analysis Technique ... 27
F. Research Procedure ... 29
CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ... 31
1. Excellent Acceptability ... 32
2. Very Good Acceptability ... 35
3. Good Acceptability ... 39
4. Sufficient Acceptability ... 41
xii
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ... 44
A. Conclusions ... 44
B. Recommendations... 45
REFERENCES ... 48
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
Table 2.1 Translation Criteria Suggested by Machali, 2000 ... 19
Table 2.2 Scoring Criteria ... 20
Table 2.3 First Acceptability Rubric made by the Researcher ... 21
Table 2.4 Final Acceptability Rubric ... 22
Table 4.1 The Overall Acceptability of English Translation Plaques ... 32
Table 4.2 Accuracy of Information from Case 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 ... 33
Table 4.3 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 2.4 ... 34
Table 4.4 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 6 ... 35
Table 4.5 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 1.1 ... 36
Table 4.6 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 1.3 ... 37
Table 4.7 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 1.2 ... 37
Table 4.8 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 7.2 ... 38
Table 4.9 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 7.3 ... 38
Table 4.10 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 7.4 ... 39
Table 4.11 Clarity and naturalness Problem from Case 3.1 ... 39
Table 4.12 Accuracy in Grammar problem from Case 3.3 ... 40
Table 4.13 Accuracy in Grammar problem from Case 3.2 ... 41
Table 4.14 Accuracy in Grammar and Naturalness Problems from Case 10.1 .... 41
xiv
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix Page
1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
This chapter deals with the important aspect of the research. This chapter
includes research background, research problem, problem limitation, research
objectives, research benefits, and definitions of terms. The first part is the research
background. The research background explains the reason for conducting the
research, some issues in translation, and the consequences of translation failure.
Then, the research problem deals with the question which is going to be answered
through this research. The third part of this chapter is the problem limitation. The
focus of the study will be limited and presented on the problem formulation part.
The next part is the research objectives and the desired outcome of the research
will be presented. The fifth part of this chapter is the research benefits of the
research for the future researchers, Fort Vredeburg Museum, the translator, and
the readers. The last part of this chapter is the definition of terms used in this
research, such as the translation acceptability and the scene plaques.
A. Research Background
Language is an essential part of human beings. As a means of
communication, a language can be different. In this world, there is more than one
language. Even in Indonesia, one region to another has different languages.
People who come from Java will speak differently, for example, people from
Central Java will speak Javanese while people from West Java will speak
(Aitchison, 2003). The way of communicating can help people to convey the
message to the interlocutor.
By communicating, a lot of messages can be delivered. To convey the
message successfully to the interlocutor, the same language should be considered.
In this case, the role of translators is important. Translators help in transferring
one language or Source Language (SL) to another language or Target Language
(TL) (Munday and Hatim, 2004).
Nowadays, translators are needed because more and more countries are
cooperating with each other in every aspect of life. Translators are needed because
not many people understand the target language. The role of translators is also
important in helping the source language users to communicate with the target
language users. This communication is not limited to the conversation in real life,
but it is also helpful in promoting certain products manufactured in foreign
countries.
In Indonesia, a lot of signs are written in both Indonesian and English to
be accessible to everyone. The purpose of the bilingual signs is to make the
foreigners know about the products or instructions of the signs. A strange sign is
found by the researcher which is placed in Ambarukmo Plaza in Yogyakarta. A
board bears a sign in Indonesian: Hati-hati kepala and it is translated into
Becareful your head. The translation is incorrect because, first, the translator
forgets the space between words. Then, the second reason, the translation is the
word-per-word translation. It is shown that being a translator is not easy. Even,
translators make a mistake in translation, it can lead into ambiguous information.
Keeping the information is necessary to avoid miscommunication.
The bilingual signs are also found in Fort Vredeburg Museum. Fort
Vredeburg Museum is a museum located in Yogyakarta. The museum is open for
public and the visitors can go to the museum from Tuesday – Sunday from 8 a.m.
to 4 p.m. The museum is famous among the local and foreign tourists and it is the
symbol of the hardship of the Indonesian people during the colonial era. As a
place where the objects of historical, scientific or artistic interest are kept
(“Museum”), Fort Vredeburg Museum gives the visitors real scenes and properties
used during the colonial era. Each scene is equipped with the explanation written
both in English and Indonesian and the explanation of the scenes is called plaques.
The aim of this paper is to analyze the acceptability of the bilingual
plaques in Fort Vredeburg Museum since the museum is widely known in
Yogyakarta; both among local and foreign tourists. The museum has four
dioramas and there are some plaques inside each diorama. The plaques are mostly
bilingual. The researcher aims to know the acceptability of the English translation
in the plaques in Diorama I. Each plaque has the Indonesian and the English
description on it. The detailed descriptions are given. Besides, there are several
Japanese and Dutch terms which are untranslatable into English.
Based on the problem above, the researcher aims to analyze the English
translation of the plaques in Fort Vredeburg Museum. The researcher is motivated
to know the acceptability of the translation. Since the plaques are also read by the
acceptable. The expected result is to find out the acceptability of the English
translation in the plaques.
B. Research Problem
From the ideas presented in the background above, not all translation
products are acceptable. The translation product should be tested further to know
its acceptability. Based on those reasons, this paper aims to answer a question:
How is the acceptability of the scene plaques in Fort Vredeburg Museum based on
Larson’s theory?
C. Problem Limitation
The problem is limited to the use of Indonesian and English, thus some
words written in Japanese, Javanese, and Dutch are ignored. The limitation is
conducted since the focus of this research is to find the acceptability of the
Indonesia – English translations. The criteria used in this research is proposed by
Machali (2000), they are excellent, very good, good, sufficient, and poor
translation. Meanwhile, the translations are checked using meaning-based theory
proposed by Larson (1984) and it covers clarity, naturalness, and accuracy of the
translations. The researcher decides to limit those strategies since they are mostly
D. Research Objectives
The aim of this research is to analyze the acceptability of the scene plaques
translation in Fort Vredeburg Museum. The acceptability covers the clarity,
accuracy, and naturalness of the plaques. The acceptability is checked using the
meaning-based theory.
E. Research Benefits
The finding of this research will be beneficial for:
1. Future Researcher
This research can be beneficial for the future researchers to follow the
same path. This research can be a guide to improve the translation of a certain
product.
2. Fort Vredeburg Museum
The results of this research will be given to Fort Vredeburg Museum
management later on. This research can be beneficial for Fort Vredeburg Museum
to produce acceptable translation of the plaques. If the plaques are corrected, they
will be beneficial for the visitors, especially for the foreigner. They will
understand the scenes given and the information they get will not be ambiguous.
3. Translator
For the translator, this research can be a guide to improve the translation of
the scene plaques in Fort Vredeburg Museum. It is a good chance to be a part of
the betterment of the translation. Moreover, it can help the translator to understand
4. Reader
This research can also be beneficial for the readers who are interested in
translation. The readers get to know some theories and can know how to check the
acceptability of a certain translation product.
F. Definition of Terms 1. Translation Acceptability
There are two main kinds of translation which are form-based translation
and meaning-based translation. The form-based itself deals with the
word-per-word translation, while the meaning-based translation deals with the
communicative meaning of the translation. The acceptable translation is the one
using as natural language as possible or in other words, the acceptable translation
uses meaning-based translation. Larson (1984: 6) states three aspects of the best
translation which are:
a) uses the normal language forms of the receptor language, b) communicates, as much as possible, to the receptor language speakers the same meaning that was understood by the speakers of the source language, and c) maintains the dynamics of the original source language text.
Some aspects should be considered, such as clarity, accuracy and naturalness.
Therefore, translation products are called acceptable if they are clear, accurate,
and natural.
2. The Scene Plaques
The scene plaques are used in Fort Vredeburg Museum to describe each
time, scene, the SL description, and the TL description. The plaques give some
8 CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter contains the review on related studies, theoretical description,
and theoretical framework of the research. The theoretical description deals with
the translation, which are the definition of translation, translation procedure,
meaning-based translation proposed by Larson, and translation acceptability. The
theoretical framework deals with summarizing the theories which can help the
researcher to find the answers to the research problem.
A. Theoretical Description 1. Review on Related Study
In this part, the researcher discussed related studies done by other
researchers. This part is important to know the focus of the research. There are
two related studies conducted to find translation acceptability.
The first is a graduate thesis written by Veniranda (2003) entitled An
Analysis on the Translation of Shiraishi’s Young Heroes: The Indonesian Family
in Politics into Pahlawan Pahlawan Belia: Keluarga Indonesia dalam Politik
based on Translation Equivalence Theories. This thesis focuses on the English –
Indonesia translation and it has three objectives. This thesis uses a translation
criteria suggested by Machali (2000) to find the acceptability of the translation.
Through her study, Veniranda finds out that the translations focus on meaning
also finds out that the translations omit or add some information to adjust them to
TL culture.
Another related study is an undergraduate thesis written by Hapsari (2014)
entitled The Acceptability of the English translations of the zoo plaque displayed
in the Gembira Loka Zoo Yogyakarta based on Larson’s theory. This thesis
focuses on the Indonesia – English translation and it has one objective. This thesis
uses Larson’s theory and it finds the acceptability of the zoo plaque translation.
The result of the study conducted by Hapsari (2014) is that the acceptability of the
English translations of the zoo plaque displayed in the Gembira Loka Zoo
Yogyakarta is poor. From the study, she finds out that 78.26% of the translations
are unacceptable due to some grammatical mistakes and unnatural sentences in the
translations.
Both studies have similarity with this research. Compared to the study
conducted by Veniranda (2003) and Hapsari (2014), this research focuses on
Indonesia – English translation and the researcher is helped by expert in
translation to make a scoring rubric based on a translation criteria suggested by
Machali (2000). Moreover, the subject of this research is the translation of the
scene plaques in Fort Vredeburg Museum. From those studies, this research
shows that there are no other studies to find the acceptability of Indonesia –
2. Translation
a. The Definition of Translation
According to Newmark (1981, p. 7), translation is a kind of work in
changing one language to another. This work, as he proposed, makes a lot of
changes in the target language. It is because the source language culture is
different from the target language culture, and that is why the translator needs to
adjust them to make the readers understand the meaning.
The process of translation involves transferring one language to another
(Bassnett, 2008). By translating one language to another, readers will understand a
text written in the source language. In line with this problem, translators have a
big role to bridge the language gap between the foreigner and the native,
according to Newmark (1988):
He works on four levels: translation is first a science, which entails the knowledge and verification of the facts and the language that describes them- here, what is wrong, mistakes of truth, can be identified; secondly, it is a skill, which calls for appropriate language and acceptable usage; thirdly, an art, which distinguishes good from undistinguished writing and is the creative, the intuitive, sometimes the inspired, level of the translation; lastly, a matter of taste, where argument ceases, preferences are expressed, and the variety of meritorious translations is the reflection of individual differences. (p. 6).
Translators are responsible to change the Source Language (SL) into the
Target Language (TL). The translation product should consider deeper about not
only the SL culture, but also the TL readers and its culture. Besides, the translators
should change their perspectives on the languages they are working into (Nida and
Taber, 1974). It is important to analyze more to prevent the ambiguity of the
language and the target language to make the readers understand the meaning. A
deep research should be done to make the translation product acceptable, readable,
and understandable.
In translating, the translators need to adjust the SL culture and the TL
culture to produce a good translation (Bassnett, 2008), “… translation as a highly
suspect activity, one in which an inequality of power relations (inequalities of
economics, politics, gender and geography) is reflected in the mechanics of
textual production.” It means that in translating something, translator does not
only translate word per word but also consider the target language cultures. The
important thing on translation is to make the target reader understand the
information given. The information they receive should be suitable with their own
society.
In translation, Newmark (1981) states that there are two strategies which
can be applied. The first is global translation strategies or often called translation
methods and the second is local translation strategies or even called translation
procedures. The translation methods include translation procedures. The
translation procedures are more specified than translation methods.
In coping with the globalization era, a lot of advertisers are willing to pay
a certain amount of money to make the products known worldwide. Translation is
a good way to make the foreigners understand the product given. According to
Munday (2001):
written text (the target text or TT) in a different verbal language (the target language or TL). (p. 11).
b. Translation Procedures
There are a lot of theories of the translation procedures proposed by the
experts of translation. Newmark (1981) proposes a theory of the translation
procedure, other experts proposed a similar theory with a different name, i.e.
translation strategy. Other experts are Vinay and Darbelnet (1995), who proposed
the same theory, which is the translation method. According to Vinay and
Darbelnet (1995, p. 128), translation procedures may vary, but the core of
translation procedures can be seen from seven procedures. According to Newmark
(1988), “while translation methods relate to whole texts, translation procedures
are used for sentences and the smaller units of language.” (p. 81).
Translation procedures proposed by Larson (1984) consist of eight steps,
which are:
1. Preparation
According to Larson (1984), preparation in translation consists of two
steps which are the preparation the translator needs before taking the translation
project and the preparation before the translator translates the project. The first
step deals with the ability of transferring the SL text into the TL text. The ability
should be mastered by the translator by taking some training in translation.
The second preparation deals with the acquaintance of the translator and
text and even the translator needs to know the background of the author to
communicate the meaning well.
2. Analysis
In analyzing the text, the translator needs to be very careful. The translator
needs to point out the terms used in the text. Larson (1984) calls the terms as the
“key words” and they should be analyzed further to understand the text. Some
adjustment should be made and a deep research should be conducted. This step is
important to help the translator familiar with the SL and it makes the translation
process easier.
3. Transfer
After analyzing the text, the text transfer will be done. This step requires
the changing language of the SL into the TL. This step, according to Larson
(1984), should be done using the meaning-based translation to make the text as
natural as possible.
4. Initial draft
According to Larson (1984, p. 481), “the work of analysis, transfer, and
initial draft are not independent the one of the other”. He points out that the key of
this process is making the translation as natural as possible. It can be done by
checking the SL text and the TL text back and forth as the translation is not an
instant process.
5. Reworking the initial draft
After working the initial draft, the draft should be checked once again to
and marking the unclear sentences is highly recommended. In this step, Larson
(1984, p. 482) states that “the reworking of the initial draft includes checking for
naturalness and for accuracy”. Checking naturalness and accuracy cover some
aspects that should be taken care of, according to Larson (1984):
1) wrong grammatical forms or obscure constructions, 2) places that seem too wordy, 3) wrong order, awkward phrasing, 4) places where the
connections don’t seem right and it doesn’t flow easily, 5) collocational
clashes, 6) questionable meaning, i.e. it seems strange now that he hears it read, and 7) style. (p. 482)
After checking is done, the translator needs to remake the initial draft. The
initial draft should be remade over and over again to make sure there is no
mistake. After the translator is sure about the initial draft, the next step is making
the second draft. This second draft is a draft containing no mistakes according to
the translator. The next stage is checking the second draft with other parties and it
will be discussed on the sixth step.
6. Testing the translation
This step requires other parties to take a part in checking the second draft.
Those parties are needed to fulfill the triangulation. Besides the translator, the
experts and the reviewers are needed to avoid the translation bias. After the
second draft is checked by other parties, the third draft should be made
considering the suggestion of the parties. There are some processes in this step
and the processes are discussed on part d.
7. Preparing the manuscript for the publisher
After the testing is completed and the draft is made, the next step to be
and it should be read by the translator and other parties. Reading the final draft is
needed to make sure that the final draft is ready.
c. Meaning-based Translation
Larson (1984) states two main kinds of translation, namely form-based
translation and meaning-based translation. The theory deals with the quality of the
translation itself. Meanwhile, the goal of translation is to make the translation
which sounds alike as the TL as much as possible.
The first theory is form-based translation or usually known as literal
translation. This kind of translation deals with translating word-per-word. The
goal of this literal translation is keeping the same grammatical form of the SL and
it is useful for studying the SL words. By translating word-per-word, the intended
meaning of the text is unknown; that is why this kind of translation is considered
as a poor translation.
Instead of translating word-per-word, the goal of translation is to translate
ideas. Meaning-based translation or usually known as idiomatic translation states
that in translation, the meaning should be suitable for the target language users.
This kind of translation does not sound like translation because the translation is
expressed as naturally as possible. Moreover, some adjustments are made to make
the target language users familiar with the words or terms used. Example 2.1
Example 2.1
SL : Saya tidak meninggalkannya.
Literal Translation : I not leave her. Idiomatic translation : I do not leave her.
In example 2.1, the literal translation translates words as exactly as the SL.
It makes a little sense and it is grammatically wrong. Meanwhile, in the idiomatic
translation, adjustment is made and it is grammatically right and acceptable.
d. Translation Testing
According to Larson (1984, pp. 488-503) in testing the translation, the
translator needs to work together with the consultants and the reviewers to make
the translation accurate, clear and natural. The test with other parties is needed to
avoid translation bias. Another reason is that when making the translation, the
translator might leave accuracy, clarity and naturalness of the text. The test should
be done to make the translation product be understood by the TL users. In this
testing, according to Larson (1984) there are some steps to be conducted, which
are:
1. Comparison with the source language
In this step, the translator needs to compare the SL and TL by doing it over
and over again. According to Larson (1984, p. 490), “the translator will make
another comparison of source language and receptor language texts, looking for
any problems or potential problems”. In making this comparison, the information
translator himself or by the people who know both SL and TL. If the translator
compares the text himself, he needs to be as objective as possible.
2. Back-translation
Back-translation is done by translating the TL into SL. According to
Larson (1984), “a back translation makes it possible for the translator and a
consultant to make a careful comparison with the source text, looking for
differences in meaning, and for inadequate application of translation principles. It
should be done by another person. This person should master the SL and TL well.
He or she should read the TL text and try to write the SL without reading the SL
text first. The purpose of the back-translation is to check if the translation
communicates the meaning well to the TL users. This back-translation is very
different from the translating process; the translating process concerns with
naturalness of the text, meanwhile the back-translation deals with meaning
equivalence.
3. Comprehension tests
This comprehension test is done by the person who is fluent in TL to retell
the information from the TL text. Then, some questions related to the text are
formulated to check the understanding of the respondent. The questions related to
the text can cover “… the discourse style, or about the theme of the text, or they
may be questions which have to do with details” (Larson, 1984, p. 490).
4. Naturalness tests
The naturalness test should be done by the reviewer who is capable in SL
this step, the reviewer not only checks the clarity and naturalness, but he or she
needs to check the accuracy.
5. Readability tests
The readability test is done by asking someone to read the text aloud. The
hesitation or the mistaken part should be marked and asked to the respondent.
Some questions related to the difficulty of reading should be prepared and asked.
6. Consistency checks
Consistency checks deal with the term used in the text. If there are some
foreign words in the text, they should be carefully checked. This consistency
check is done to communicate the same meaning. Some questions should be
prepared in this consistency check to be analyzed further.
7. Using the testing results
The testing results are used to do the next stages, which are preparation,
analysis, transfer, initial draft, reworking the initial draft, testing the translation,
polishing the manuscript, and preparing the manuscript for the publisher. Some
checking should be done again to make sure that the tests are valid and acceptable.
e. Acceptable Translation
The goal of translation is to produce an acceptable translation. Acceptable
translation is a translation which can fulfil three categories, namely accurate,
clear, and natural (Larson, 1984, p. 485). Besides, some criteria are also important
to know the quality of the translation. Machali, 2000, suggested the criteria to
Table 2.1 Translation Criteria Suggested by Machali, 2000
Category Score Indicator
Excellent 86-90 translation. There are no vocabulary mistakes; only one or two spelling mistakes (in Arabic, no spelling mistakes are than 15% of the translation. Only one or two non-standard terms. Only one or two spelling mistakes (in Arabic, no spelling mistakes are allowed).
Sufficient 46-60
(D)
It feels like a translation; some literal translation but not more than 25%. Some idiomatic and grammatical mistakes, but not more than 25% from the whole text. Only one or two non-standard/not common and/ unclear terms.
Poor 20-45
(E)
It sounds like a translation; too many awkward literal translation (more than 25% of the whole text). Distortions of meanings and vocabulary mistakes are more than 25% of the whole text.
Based on the criteria, the researcher made the acceptability rubric and
helped by an expert in translation. The rubric is a compilation of some theories in
translation. The criteria were divided into four namely idiomatic, near idiomatic,
modified literal, and very literal. The scoring was adapted from Machali (2000)
and they are divided into five categories. The highest total score would be 12 and
it made the excellent translation. In the contrary, the lowest total score would be 3
and it made the poor translation. Detailed scoring of the translation is expressed in
Table 2.2.
Firstly, an acceptable translation is clear. A translation is clear when it can
understood by TL users who are not familiar with SL text. It is important to avoid
ambiguities so it will not cause a confusion from the readers.
Table 2.2 Scoring Criteria
Score Criteria
3-4 Poor
5-6 Sufficient
7-8 Good
9-10 Very Good
11-12 Excellent
Then, the second criteria of an acceptable translation is natural. Natural
means the TL users are familiar with the idiomatic forms used. To be natural, the
translator should translate ideas, not words (Larson, 1984). Awkward sentences
and transitions that make a translation sound awkward should be avoided.
The last thing is accuracy. It means in translating SL into TL, the
information should be preserved. The information is transferred without omission,
addition, or deletion (Larson, 1984). Since translation is not only concerned about
changing words; it is also concerned about the culture of both SL and TL, some
adjustment should be made. Necessary addition and deletion related to the
information are acceptable as long as the purpose of this addition and deletion is
to elaborate the information which is unknown to the TL users. In doing so, the
researcher makes a rubric helped by the expert in translation. The rubric itself is
not perfect from the beginning, so the researcher consults the expert in translation
Table 2.3 First Acceptability Rubric made by the Researcher
Score
Category 4 (Idiomatic)
3 (Near Idiomatic)
2 (Modified
Literal) 1 (Very Literal)
Clear Score: 1-4= unacceptable 4-8= corrections are needed 9-12= acceptable
For the first rubric, the researcher has not provided a clear scoring criteria
and because of that, the expert suggests to check the translation criteria proposed
by Machali (2000). Then, for the second consultation, the researcher comes up
with the scoring criteria and improves the rubric by combining it with the
translation criteria. After checking the rubric carefully, the expert suggests some
aspects and proper criteria for the translation. Then, the rubric is going into
acceptability rubric made by the researcher with the help of the expert is presented
in Table 2.4.
Table 2.4 Final Acceptability Rubric
Score
Category 4 (Idiomatic)
3 (Near Idiomatic)
2 (Modified
Literal) 1 (Very Literal)
Clarity
check the acceptability of the translation of the plaques. In this part, the researcher
explains how the theories are used to check if the translation is acceptable.
The researcher uses the theory proposed by Larson (1984) to check the
accuracy, clarity, and the naturalness of the plaques. The researcher makes a
rubric helped by the expert to evaluate the translation. The accuracy will be tested
by comparing the SL text to the TL text and naturalness checking. In comparing
the TL text, the researcher will do it herself, while the naturalness checking will
be done by asking the expert and the researcher herself.
The last testing proposed by Larson (1984) is checking the naturalness, the
researcher will use the naturalness tests. The naturalness checking is to check the
naturalness and the accuracy of the bilingual plaques. The researcher and the
expert will look for the weird words or sentences found in the text. The words and
24 CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter includes research method, research setting, research subject,
research instrument and data gathering technique, data analysis technique, and
research procedure.
A. Research Method
The research was under qualitative data method. According to Strauss and
Corbin (1997), “qualitative data analysis is a search for general statements about
relationships and underlying themes; it builds grounded theory” (as cited in
Marshall and Rossman, 2006, p. 154). The data were obtained from the bilingual
plaques in Fort Vredeburg Museum and some related literatures were linked to the
data. The bilingual plaques were taken from Diorama I. The research was aimed
to find the acceptability of the bilingual plaques using Larson’s meaning-based
theory.
Then, the method of this research is document analysis. According to
Fraenkel, Wallen, and Hyun (2015), “content or document analysis is a technique
that enables researchers to study human behavior in an indirect way, through an
analysis of their communication” (p. 476). The comparison of the texts, both in
the source language and the target language, were analyzed to find the
B. Research Setting
The data were collected twice on 14 September 2015 and 20 September
2015 in Fort Vredeburg Museum. The data were obtained by taking pictures of the
plaques. The researcher decided to use only ten plaques out of forty-eight and they
were taken from Diorama I. The researcher was focusing on the non-random
sampling and the plaques chosen were from Prince Diponegoro era until Japanese
colonial in Indonesia. There was no special permission needed to take the pictures
since it is a public place and the plaques are categorized as the public documents.
C. Research Subject
The researcher and Fort Vredeburg museum plaques act as the subject of
the research. The data are obtained by the researcher and the data analysis is done
by the researcher. The testing is conducted by the researcher to find the
acceptability of the plaques. Moreover, the researcher was actively participated on
the research process.
D. Instruments and Data Gathering Technique
The data were collected from Fort Vredeburg museum. The researcher did
not need a special permission to get in on the museum. Moreover, the researcher
need not ask a permission to take pictures of the plaques because the plaques were
public documents. The main research instrument for this research was the
1. Human
The instrument of this research is human or the researcher herself. Larson
(1984, p. 489), proposed some criteria for the researcher on translation. The first is
the researcher should know both languages. The second is the researcher should
be able to write in the target language. Lastly, the researcher should have the
academic background of the translation studies. The plaques mainly contain two
languages which are Indonesia (source language) and English (target language),
but some plaques used Japanese and Javanese terms. Since the research focused
on the translation between English and Indonesian, the terms in Japanese and
Javanese were ignored. The researcher knows and able to write on both languages;
English and Indonesian. In terms of educational background, the researcher is the
student at the English Language Education Study Program, which enables the
researcher to communicate fluently in English.
2. Documents
The documents are obtained from Fort Vredeburg museum plaques and
there are forty-eight of them. The plaques used are the plaques in Diorama I and
there are ten plaques. The documents consist of some information about the scene
presented. The document on the museum plaques contain both source and target
language which are Indonesia and English. Some plaques contain Javanese and
Japanese terms, but they will be ignored.
3. Rubric
The rubric was made by the researcher and helped by an expert in
the most used theories are the meaning-based translation theory proposed by
Larson (1984) and a translation criteria proposed by Machali (2000). Those
theories are combined into a scoring rubric to judge the translation. It contains
clarity, naturalness, and accuracy category and the total score of it will determine
the translation criteria.
E. Data Analysis Technique
In analyzing the data, the research used a theory proposed by Larson
which has four steps. This step was the important part of this research. By taking
this step, the acceptability of the plaques would be known. First, the researcher
retyped the texts from the plaques. Second, the findings were analyzed and
classified using the meaning-based translation theory proposed by Larson. The
theory is about the translation testing which consist of comparing the source text,
back-translating into the source language, comprehension checks, naturalness and
readability testing, and consistency checks. According to Larson (1984), a good
translation is a translation which is clear, natural, and accurate, and based on the
theory the researcher only used three steps; clarity checking, naturalness checking
and accuracy checking. To check the acceptability, an acceptability rubric was
made by the researcher based on some theories and helped by the expert in
translation. In this rubric, the researcher suggested three criteria based on Larson
(1984, p. 17), namely clarity, naturalness, and accuracy. Besides, there are four
scores for each criteria, namely idiomatic, near idiomatic, modified literal, and
The first step in analyzing the data was checking the data using the scoring
rubric. The first checking is clarity checking, the researcher pointed out the
intended meaning of the text. Clear translation is a translation which can
communicate to the readers (Larson, 1984). To fulfill the acceptability criteria, the
text should be able to deliver the meaning to the readers. Moreover, the sentences
should flow smoothly and should not have ambiguities. In this checking, TL text
was analyzed and marked. Sentences which were hardly understood should be
marked as unclear sentences. After the clarity was known, then the process went
to naturalness checking.
Then, in the naturalness checking. The researcher pointed out about the
ideas of the text. As the criteria of meaning-based translation, the natural
translation should not translate words but it should translate ideas (Larson, 1984).
To be acceptable, the ideas should be translated in the natural form of the TL.
The last checking is accuracy checking. In this checking, the comparison
of the SL text and TL text are checked and marked. Any addition, deletion, and
difference should be highlighted. Then, these addition, deletion, and difference
were analyzed further. Besides, in the accuracy, sentence structure should be
correct. Then after all categories are checked, each score will be added to know
the total score. The researcher categorized the data into five criteria which were
excellent, very good, good, sufficient, and poor. The excellent translation is the
translation which total score is 3 or 4. Meanwhile, the very good translation is the
translation which total score is 5 or 6, and so on. Then in the last step, the data
F. Research Procedure
In the research, the researcher used some procedures, the first is collecting
the data. The data were obtained by taking some pictures using cameras and some
blurred words were retyped in cell phone. After the data were obtained, the data
were retyped and put into tables. Both Indonesian and English versions of the data
were included into the table.
After the data were collected, related theories were connected to analyze
the data. After understanding the theories, the researcher found the good criteria
of the translation product. An acceptability rubric was made to evaluate the
translation. Then, the data were categorized into several categories to check the
acceptability of the translation. There were 5 categories for the translation, namely
excellent, very good, good, sufficient, and poor.
Then the third is triangulation. Triangulation is needed to avoid translation
bias. According to Fraenkel, Wallen, and Hyun (2015), “it involves checking what
one hears and sees by comparing one’s sources of information” (p. 515). The
triangulation was done by the expert in the translation field who masters both SL
and TL. The expert is a lecturer of English Education Study Program in Sanata
Dharma University and she understands both SL and TL. Larson (1984), proposed
that the translation tester should understand the translation principles and
understand the TL well. Since she wrote about translation in her master degree,
she knows about the translation principles.
At first, the researcher provides a questionnaire to be answered by three
questionnaire is not good since the researcher may not learn from it. Then based
on her suggestion, the triangulation is done orally with only one expert in
translation to save some times since the oral triangulation will not finish quickly.
This oral triangulation is carried out as suggested by the expert and it is proven to
be meaningful since it requires a discussion between the researcher and the expert.
In this triangulation, the researcher points out some reasons in giving the score for
each text and gives a suggestion for the correct translation. Then, the expert will
agree or disagree with the reasons; she will give some suggestions and it will help
the researcher giving the correct scoring for the translation.
After the result of the data were known, the data were presented. The
result was typed and concluded to answer the research question. The data were put
into excellent, very good, good, sufficient, and poor category. Some suggestion
and correction were also presented. By presenting the data, it would be useful for
31 CHAPTER IV
RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter contains the results and findings of the research of the
acceptability of the Fort Vredeburg Museum bilingual plaques. In this chapter, the
overall results and detailed description of the research are presented. Moreover,
the research question is answered in this chapter.
In finding the acceptability of the translated plaques, some theories from
experts are used. The checking was done by using the rubric based on the theory
proposed by Larson (1984) namely meaning-based translation. There are some
tests on it, but the researcher only uses three types of test since the goal is to check
the acceptability of the bilingual plaques.
The types of test used by the researcher are clarity checking, naturalness
checking, and accuracy checking. As mentioned on the previous chapters, clarity
checking is done by reading through the text and marking the unclear sentences.
Then, the naturalness checking is done by analyzing the diction and expression of
the text. Lastly, the comparison test and grammar checking are done to check the
accuracy of the translated text.
In this research, the researcher presents the case based on the acceptability
score. The complete cases are presented on the appendix. Through this research,
the researcher found five categories of the translated plaques. The categories are
further whether it has good and/ bad phrases, and good and/ bad sentences. The
acceptability of the overall cases is presented in table 4.1.
Table 4.1 The Overall Acceptability of English Translation Plaques
Case Number
Clarity Naturalness Accuracy Total Score
Acceptability
1 4 3 3 10 Very Good
2 4 4 4 12 Excellent
3 2 2 4 8 Good
4 2 3 4 7 Good
5 4 2 4 10 Very Good
6 4 3 4 11 Excellent
7 4 3 3 10 Very Good
8 4 3 4 11 Excellent
9 4 3 3 10 Very Good
10 2 2 2 6 Sufficient
The highest score found in this research is 12 and it is considered as
excellent translation, meanwhile the lowest score is 6 and it is considered as
sufficient translation. From table 4.1, the total score is added together then it is
divided by total case number which is 10, and the overall acceptability of the
English translation plaques is 9.5 out of 12. From the overall acceptability, the
translations are categorized as very good translations. Each category has been
discussed with the expert in translation and it is discussed further.
1. Excellent Acceptability
The goal of the translation is to communicate the ideas to the TL users
(Larson, 1984). In the clarity, the translation should make the readers understand
the intended meaning of the text and it should have good flow sentences. Then, in
naturalness, the translation should be in idiomatic form or translated in
meaning-based translation. In accuracy, the information from the SL should not be omitted,
information skewed. Moreover, accuracy in grammar should be concerned. In this
research, the bilingual plaques are excellent if the score is 11 or 12; three cases
have excellent accuracy, namely case 2, 6, and 8.
Case number 2 is scored 12 and it is shown that it has excellent
acceptability. There are no serious problems found, yet three good phrases and a
bad sentence are found. In case number 2, the researcher found three additions,
namely case 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3. The additions are underlined and presented in table
4.2.
Table 4.2 Accuracy of Information from Case 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3
Case Source Language Target Language
2.1 AI
KONGRES BUDI UTOMO DI YOGYAKARTA
FIRST CONGRESS OF BUDI UTOMO IN YOGYAKARTA
2.2 AI
Lokasi : Ruang Makan
Kweekschool Yogyakarta (SMU 11, Jl. AM. Sangaji Yogyakarta)
Location : Dining Room of
Kweekschool Yogyakarta (State Senior High School, SMU 11, AM. Sangaji Street. Yogyakarta)
2.3 AI
Adegan : Sutomo (Pelajar STOVIA) menyampaikan gagasan di Konggres I Boedi Oetomo di Gedung
Kweekschool Yogyakarta.
Scene : Sutomo, a student of
STOVIA (Medical School for the Indigenous People), was explaining his ideas in The First Congress of Boedi Oetomo in Kweekschool Yogyakarta.
From table 4.2, the additions are considered good since the TL readers are
not familiar with the terms from SL. From case 2.1, the addition is on the word
first, it gives the TL readers more information since the readers probably do not
know that the congress is held twice. Meanwhile, additions in case 2.2 and 2.3 are
about terms in SL. A goodness from those cases is that the translator does not
simply put the original words or the translations only, but he adds the translation
The first term is the word SMU; in Indonesia, it means Sekolah Menengah
Umum or in English it is a high school and SMU 11 is a state school, therefore the
translation is correct and presented in case 2.2. Meanwhile, STOVIA stands for
School tot Opleiding van Indilandsche Artsen and it is a medical school in Dutch
colonial era. The translation for STOVIA is presented in case 2.3. and it is a
correct translation. Those additions are good since the addition of necessary
information will make TL readers understand more about the things which are
being discussed.
Table 4.3 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 2.4
Case Source Language Target Language Suggestion
2.4 AG
Setelah Boedi Oetomo terbentuk tanggal 20 Mei 1908, segera dibentuk cabang-cabang di daerah.
The organization Boedi Oetomo was established on May 20, 1908 and was immediately followed by establishment of the branches in some regions.
The organization Boedi Oetomo was established on May 20, 1908 and was immediately followed by establishments of
branches in some regions.
Only one bad sentence is found and it is presented in table 4.3. It is
considered bad because it lacks of accuracy in terms of grammar. The mistake is
related to the use of article the. As a rule of grammar, the word establishment is a
countable noun and it should be followed by plural noun. The use of article the
before word branches is incorrect since it is general and has not been mentioned
before. On the contrary, the word establishment is specific since it has been
discussed earlier and it should have article the in it or it should be added with -s
since the branches here are more than one and it makes the establishment more
than once. The suggestion is to change the phrase establishment of the branches
This research focuses on the big picture of translation which means it is to
check whether the readers understand the message of the translation or not. From
the problem in table 4.3, the use of article is not considered as a serious problem
since the message of the translation is clear. Moreover, the information is
preserved and it avoids translation bias.
Meanwhile, some serious mistakes are found from case 6, and they are
presented in table 4.4. Those cases have some untranslated words and they may
make the TL readers confused if they have not read the other plaques. Since those
words are not translated, the score for naturalness is 3; but for the clarity, the score
is 4 because those words do not affect its entire translation, meaning that the TL
readers can still get the intended meaning of the text by reading through it. Those
words are lokasi, waktu, and adegan. The same untranslated words are also found
in case 8 and it also gets 3 for the score. The suggestion for those cases is to
translate those words to avoid confusion and the correct translations for lokasi is
location, waktu is time, and adegan is scene.
Table 4.4 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 6
Case Source Language Target Language Suggestion
6.1 C/N
Lokasi Lokasi Location
6.2 C/N
Waktu Waktu Time
6.3 C/N
Adegan Adegan Scene
2. Very Good Acceptability
A translation is considered very good translation if it has 9 or 10 for the
7, and 9. Those cases get 4 for the clarity which mean they can be easily
understood and no serious mistakes is found. For the naturalness and accuracy,
distortion of meaning and some grammatical mistakes are found in those cases.
Table 4.5 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 1.1
Case Source Language Target Language Suggestion
1.1 AG
sejak 21 Juli – 9 Oktober 1825
Since July 21 to October 9, 1825
From July 21 to October 9, 1825
Some grammatical mistakes are found in case 1 and they make case 1 gets
only 3 for the score. The first mistake is related to the choice of conjunction. From
table 4.5, the word sejak which means from a particular time in the past until a
later time, or until now. The translation for this word used in the case is since and
it is not wrong. The word since here is the literal translation of the word sejak.
The reason which makes it wrong is the following words. It is said that the event
was happened until 1825 and according to Cambridge Advanced Learner’s
Dictionary, the word since should be used to signal time in the past until now.
Therefore, the word since should be replaced with the word from because it
indicates a range of time. Therefore, a correct translation for sejak 21 Juli – 9
Oktober 1825 is from July 21 to October 9, 1825.
The second problem found in case 1 is about redundancy. From table 4.6,
the sentence there were a lot of Yogyakarta nobles gathered in Selarong is
redundant since the sentence has two verbs on it; the phrase there were and the
word gathered. The suggestion is to delete the phrase there were to avoid
Table 4.6 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 1.3
Case Source Language Target Language Suggestion
1.3 AG
Akhir Juli 1825, di Selarong berkumpul
gathered in Selarong. They were Prince Mangkubumi, they were ready to fight with Prince Diponegoro they were ready to fight with Prince Diponegoro against the Dutch.
Beside of those problems, case 1 has a goodness in it. The goodness found
is about the accuracy in information and it is presented in table 4.7. From case 1.2,
the SL does not give detailed information about who leads the attack. Meanwhile
in TL, the translator gives an information that the attack was led by someone. The
addition is on the phrase under the leadership of the Resident Chevalier and it is
considered good to give additional information to the readers.
Table 4.7 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 1.2
Case Source Language Target Language
1.2 AI
Tangal 20 Juli 1825 Belanda berhasil mengepung kediaman Pangeran Diponegoro di Tegalrejo.
On July 20, 1825, under the leadership of the Resident Chevalier, the Dutch surrounded the residence of Prince Diponegoro in Tegalrejo.
Some problems are also found in case 7 and this case get only 3 for
naturalness and accuracy. The first problem is from case 7.2 and it is related to the
of the abbreviation STOVIA. Although it has been mentioned before in the
previous plaque, the addition is necessary since the TL readers may not read the
previous plaque. The suggestion is to add additional information for the
abbreviation STOVIA which is Medical School for the Indigenous People.
Table 4.8 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 7.2
Case Source Language Target Language Suggestion
7.2 AI
STOVIA STOVIA STOVIA (Medical School for the
Indigenous People)
The next problems are found in case 7.3 and it is also related to naturalness
and accuracy. The first problem is on the phrase but then and according to the rule
of grammar, the word but should not be placed in front of the sentence when used
in the formal context. Since the plaque is considered as formal document, the
conjunction is considered wrong. The second problem from the phrase but then is
related to the accuracy of information in terms of the use of conjunction. The
Indonesian phrase for but then is tetapi selajutnya and it shows a contrast or
difference. On the contrary, the SL word used is selanjutnya or then in English
and it shows continuity. Since the meaning of those conjunctions are different, the
suggestion for the phrase but then is to delete the word but to make an accurate
translation.
Table 4.9 Accuracy in Grammar from Case 7.3
Case Source Language Target Language Suggestion
7.3 AI / AG / N
Selanjutnya, nama Tri Koro Dharmo diubah menjadi Jong Java pada tahun 1918.
But then, Tri Koro Dharmo was renamed into Jong Java in 1918 in Solo.
