The Grammatical Functions of Korean Sentences in Yun Dong Ju’s Poem Titled 길 (Gil/The Road) and its
Indonesian Equivalent
Lia Amelia Nurkhazanah1, Ypsi Soeria Soemantri2, Wagiati3, Puspa Mirani Kadir4 Department of Linguistics, Padjajaran University, Indonesia1,2,3,4
Email: [email protected]1
Submitted: 31/12/2021 Revised: 15/02/2022 Accepted: 24/06/2022
E-ISSN : 2579-4574 P-ISSN : 2549-7359 Abstract. The aim of this study is to compare the grammatical functions contained in Yun Dong Ju's poem entitled 길 (Gil/The Road) in the book Puisi untuk Rakyat Indonesia (Poetry for Indonesian People) translated by Chung Young Rim. The data were analyzed based on the syntactic structure in the source language, which is Korean, and its translation into the target language, which is Indonesian, to implement the study of syntactic theory and its application in the field of comparative literary translation. The method of this research was descriptive contrastive qualitative. Meanwhile, the data collection techniques were observing and taking notes. First of all, the researchers explained the grammatical functions contained in the poem both in Korean and Indonesian, and then compared the syntactic function data. The results of the study on Yun Dong Ju’s poem entitled (Gil/ The Road) that focused on the comparison between the grammatical functions in the source language and those in the target language showed that there are 4 times occurrence of the addition of subjects and 1 time occurrence of the addition of adjunct in the target language;
5 changes in grammatical functions, 4 deletions of grammatical functions in the target language, and 2 diction differences in grammatical functions. Furthermore, there are 2 data that show no changes in in its grammatical functions. The changes in the syntactic structure found in Yun Dong Ju’s poem entitled길 (Gil/The Road) occurred to avoid ambiguity in conveying meaning since in Indonesian, clear subjects and adjuncts are needed. Therefore, the translation system tends to be broader than the source language.
Keywords: Syntax, Grammatical Functions, Poem, Korean, Indonesian https://ojs.unm.ac.id/eralingua
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
INTRODUCTION
Poem is a literary work that communicates deep meaning. Therefore, the right insight is needed to analyze the diction contained in it in order to understand its meaning. As stated by Laila (2016), language style used in poems by deliberately distorting diction is useful to convey a strong expression and a beautiful impression.
It can be assumed that choosing words for poems is not an easy task since meanings should be appropriately conveyed in chosen words.
Poetry flourished all over the world; one of which is South Korea. As stated by Irbah dan dkk. (2020), during the Japanese colonial era, Korean people tried to express their feelings through literary works. One of the famous poets from South Korea is Yun Dong Ju. In this study, the researchers examined the poem by Yun Dong Ju, who, according to Yuniasti (2019), is famous for his work, which centers around humanity and desire to make Korea an independent country. His work is still very fondly remembered in the hearts of Koreans and even foreigners who empathize with him.
In this modern era, translated poems are widely spread with the help of increasingly advanced technological developments. Thus, people can enjoy foreign works conveniently by simply using the internet or reading literary translations that can be found in various places. However, it is not uncommon to find obstacles in the process of translating a poem. Conveying the meaning of a poem is not an easy task as the words in poems cannot be translated roughly. According to Newmark in Nuryadi (2012), the problem commonly faced by translators in translating literary works is the cultural influence from the source language and the moral message the poets intend to convey. Translating poems causes great concern in translators as they have to deal with rhymes in each word that has its own unit of meaning.
One of the theoretical foundations known useful for the translation of poetry is syntactic linguistics which plays a role in studying the structure of sentences. This can then be studied based on grammatical functions, grammatical categories and their semantic roles. As the existence and knowledge of translated poetry is important in everyday life, researchers were interested in studying and analyzing the grammatical functions of Yun Dong Ju’s Korean poem and Indonesian translations entitled 길 (Gil/The Road) in the book ‘Puisi buat Rakyat Indonesia’
Chung (2007). In this book, the poems are not translated literally. The analysis of grammatical functions in the poem is expected to be able to provide extensive knowledge about how to convey the meaning of a poem through comparisons of syntactic structures, especially grammatical functions, commonly found in translated poems.
The theory used by the researchers in this study is syntactic function according to Khairah (2014, pp. 113-131) and Lee Ju Haeng / 이주행 (2006, pp. 232- 247) who argued that grammatical functions are divided into subject, predicate, object, and adjunct. Then, in Korean, syntactic functions have prepositions and exclamations. According to Khairah dan Ridwan (2014) and Lee Ju Haeng / 이주행 (2006), the subject in a sentence is an important component in addition to the predicate. This is because the subject can identify who or whom the sentence is
about. The subject usually contains a noun, a noun phrase, or a pronoun. In Korean, the subject is called 주어 (ju-eo). As the syntactic function in Korean can be seen from the particle, the subject in Korean can have the particle 은/는 (eun/neun) and 이/가 (i/ga) to determine the topic of the sentence. The predicate describes an action, a process, a circumstance, an experience, existence or a position which are verbal or adjective phrases, but do not rule out the possibility that they can be in words from other parts of speech. In Korean, the predicate is called 서술어 (sesur- eo), which describes ‘what or how’ and has the particle 다 (da) at the end of a sentence.
Meanwhile, the object plays a role as a target, a receiver, or an outcome. In Korean, the object is called 목적어 (mokjeok-eo) and is marked with the predicate 을/를 (eul / reul). The complement has the same characteristics as the object, but it can be in the form of a noun phrase, an adjective phrase, or a verbal phrase. Also, the complement directly follows the predicate if it has no object. The complement also cannot be passive and cannot be changed using 'its'. In Korean, the complement is called 보어 (bo-eo) and is usually attached to the particle 이가 (i/ga dwenda) or 이/가 (i/da yeoginda).
Meanwhile, the adjunct functions to give some additional information in a sentence that can be in the form of an adverb of place, time, tool, purpose, manner, accompaniment, cause, etc. In Korean, the adjunct is called 부사어 (busa-eo) which has almost the same characteristics as the adjunct in Indonesian; it gives information about how, where, when, and so on. In addition, the adjunct in Korean is placed before verbs or adjectives. As for in Korean, the syntactic function of an adjunct is further divided into a delimiter function 관형어 (gwan-hyeong-eo), placed before a noun. In addition, in Korean there is also 독립어 (deokrim-eo) or an exclamation that can stand alone.
Some previous studies have discussed syntax, especially in the field of grammatical functions in Indonesian and Korean, and some have compared the two. The first similar research was conducted by Enggarwati dan Utomo (2021) entitled “Fungsi, Peran, dan Kategori Sintaksis Bahasa Indonesia dalam Kalimat Berita dan Kalimat Seruan pada Naskah Pidato Bung Karno 17 Agustus 1945”. This study analyzed the functions, roles, and syntactic categories in Indonesian declarative sentences and exclamations and found that one sentence has more than one type of functions, roles and syntactic categories. The second research was conducted by Wardani dan Utomo (2021) entitled “Analisis Fungsi, Peran dan Kategori Sintaksis pada Opini “Vaksin Covid 19 Penahan Resesi” oleh Sarman Simanjorang dalam Koran Suara Merdeka” with an aim to descrive the syntactic functions, categories, and roles in sentences contained in the opinion piece about the Covid-19 vaccine as recession resistant.
Another research was conducted by Akbar (2020) with the title
‘Perbandingan Variasi Struktur Sintaksis Bahasa Indonesia Dengan Bahasa Korea dalam Terjemahan “Buku Cerita Kuno Indonesia-Korea 1” Karya Shin Young-Ji, Dkk’. This study examined variations in the syntactic structure of Indonesian and Korean in the translation book of Indonesian and Korean folklore.
All these studies have proven that previous researchers have discussed the syntactic functions of Indonesian and Korean. However, few research has been done to examine the grammatical functions found in translated poetry, especially Korean poetry which is translated into Indonesian. The current researchers chose translated-into-Indonesian Korean poetry due to the phenomenon of the widespread translation of Korean poetry into Indonesian. The distinctive language style of poetry makes it impossible to be translated roughly. This is because when translating poetry, many adjustments are made to convey the meaning of the poem in the target language more accurately. Based on this background, the current researchers hoped that this research can provide new insights or knowledge to students and translators regarding the comparison of grammatical functions in poem, especially a poem that is translated from Korean into Indonesian.
RESEARCH METHOD
This is a qualitative descriptive study that aims to describe the comparison between the grammatical functions in the Korean poem titled 길 (Gil) and those in the same poem translated into Indonesian under the title Jalan (The Road) by Chung (2007) in the book titled Puisi buat Rakyat Indonesia (Poetry for Indonesians).
According to Moleong (2017), qualitative research aims to understand the phenomena experienced by research subjects and discuss them by means of descriptions in the form of language, in a special natural context. Meanwhile, Nazir (2014) argued that descriptive research aims to make a systematic, factual and accurate description of the facts, characteristics and relationships between the phenomena investigated.
The data were collected by doing observation and taking notes. Sudaryanto (2015) stated that observation is done by observing the use of language in the object under study. As for this study, during data collection, the researchers read each line of the poem 길 (Gil/The Road) both in the source language and target language and then identified the grammatical functions contained in the poems.
Note taking, however, according to Mahsun (2005), is done to record several forms that are relevant to the research from the use of written language. In this study, the researchers took notes of the grammatical functions contained in the lines of the poem 길 (Gil/The Road) by Yun Dong Ju both in the source language and the target language.
In terms of data analysis, James (1998) argued that there are two stages that researchers must perform when comparing the components of two languages.
First, researchers describe the presence of the primary components of the two languages based on the level and purpose of the language through translation.
Second, researchers compare between the data in the source language and that in the target language in order to discover the similarities and differences in terms of
the grammar of the two languages. This is in line with Di Pietro (1968) who stated that analysis is performed in four stages, namely: (1) collecting research objects, (2) presenting comparisons in the same lingual form in the target language through translations, (3) analyzing the contrasting data between the two languages, (4) presenting the contrastive results in the results of analysis.
The following are the steps of data analysis:
1. The researchers read the lines of the poem entitled 길 (Gil/The Road) by Yun Dong Ju in the book Puisi buat Rakyat Indonesia translated by Chung (2007).
2. The researchers took notes of the grammatical functions contained in each data both in the source language and target language.
3. The researchers describe the similarities and differences between the grammatical functions in the source language and those in the target language.
4. The researchers made conclusions from the results of comparing the grammatical functions in the source language with those in the target language.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The results of analysis found 12 data in Yun Dong Ju’s poem titled 길 (Gil/The Road). The data taken is a comparison between the grammatical functions contained in the poem in Korean and those in the poem translated into Indonesian in the book titled ‘Puisi buat Rakyat Indonesia’ Chung (2007). Meanwhile, the analysis of the grammatical functions of the Korean language was based on the rules of grammatical functions according to 이주행 (2006), while the analysis of the grammatical functions in Indonesian was based on the theory proposed by Khairah dan Ridwan (2014). The results of analysis are discussed as follows.
Data Analysis 1
Table 1. Data 1 Korean (Source Language)
잃어버렸습니다.
[irheoberyeosseumnida]
Already lost Already lost
P Indonesian (Target Language)
I Lost Something
S P O
The data above shows a difference between the source language and the target language. In Korean, the grammatical functions consist of only the predicate with the verb 잃어버렸습니다 (irheoberyeosseumnida/already lost). However, in Indonesian, the grammatical functions consist of ‘S-P-O’. The subject is the pronoun
aku (I). The predicate is the verb kehilangan (lost). Meanwhile, the object is the noun sesuatu (something).
It can be seen that there is a difference in the number of grammatical functions between the source language and the target language. In Korean, there is only a predicate 잃어버렸습니다 (irheoberyeosseumnida/already lost). Meanwhile, there are a subject and an object in Indonesian. As stated by Kwon Jae-il / 권재일 (1992), in Korean written language, the subject or object is not required to be present in a sentence. Thus, it can be assumed that the subject as the experiencer in the sentence is the poet himself. In Indonesian grammar, however, according to Alwi, Dardjowidjojo, dkk. (2010), the subject is the most important component in a sentence after the predicate. The translator chose to add a subject and an object to show who the experiencer and the target are in the sentence so that the meaning of the poem can be well understood.
Data Analysis 2
Table 2. Data 2 Korean (Source Language) 무얼
[mueol]
what
어디다 [eodida]
where
잃었는 지 몰라 [irheoneunji molla]
I don't know about the loss What and where it lost don’t know
S P
Indonesian (Target Language)
I don’t know what and where
P S
It can be seen that there is a difference in the number of grammatical functions between the source language and the target language. In Korean, the grammatical functions consist of ‘S-P’. The subject is the phrase 무얼 어디다 잃어는지 (mueol eodida irheotnenji/what and where it lost) Then, the predicate is the verb 몰라 (meolla/don’t know). However, in Indonesian, the grammatical functions consist of ‘P-S’. The predicate is the verb phrase ku tidak tahu (I don’t know), followed by the noun phrase apa dan dimana (what and where), which functions as the subject.
Therefore, it can be assumed that there is no significant difference in the grammatical functions between the source language and the target language.
However, there is a slight difference that can be seen from the source language.
The Korean grammatical function begins with the subject 무얼 잃어는지 (mueol
eodida irheotnenji/what and where it lost) that explains that something is the main topic in the sentence, and is followed by the predicate몰라 (meolla/don’t know).
Lee Juhaeng / 이주행 (2006).
Meanwhile, in the target language, the grammatical function begins with the predicate ku tidak tahu (I don't know) to indicate the subject’s state, which is then followed by the subject apa dan dimana (what and where) which is the focus of the sentence. Khairah dan Ridwan (2014).
Data Analysis 3
Table 3. Data 3 Korean (Source Language) 두 손이
[du soni]
two hands
주머니를 [jumeonireul]
pockets
더듬어 [deodeumeo]
grope
길에 [gire]
the road
나아갑니다 [na-a- gamnida]
go down Two hands grope pockets (I)
ø
Go Down
the road
S P O S
ø
P A
Indonesian (Target Language) I returned to the
alley
my two hands
grope pockets
S P A S P O
It can be seen that the grammatical functions of the source language consists of ‘S-P-O-Sø-P-A’. As stated by Lee Juhaeng/ 이주행 (2006), the subject is the noun phrase 두 (du soni/two hands), which is marked by the particle 이 (i); the predicate is the verb 더듬어 (deodeumeo/grope); the object is the noun 주머니를 (jumorireul/pockets), marked with the particle 을/를 (eul/reul); the second subject is the unspecified pronoun‘I’ in the source language data; the second predicate is the verb 나아갑니다 (na-a-gamnida/go); and the adjunct is the noun phrase 길에] (gir- e/down the road), which is marked with an adverb of place 에 (e).
However, in Indonesian, the grammatical functions consist of ‘S-P-A-S-P-O’.
Based on the definition by Khairah dan Ridwan (2014), the subject is the pronoun aku (I) which indicates the actor in the sentence; the predicate is the verb kembali (return), which indicates the action; the adjunct is the noun phrase ke lorong (to the alley), which indicates the place; the second subject is the noun phrase dua tanganku (my two hands), which indicates the experiencer; the second predicate is
the verb meraba (grope); and the object is the noun kantung (pockets) as the target in the sentence.
Therefore, it can be assumed that there is no significant difference in grammatical functions between the source language and the target language.
However, the slight difference can be seen from the absence of the subject aku (I) in the target language, but is shown explicitly in the source language before the adjunct 길에 (gir-e/down the road). This is because if the subject ‘I’ is not mentioned in Korean, it can be understood that the poet is the actor.
Data Analysis 4
Table 4. Data 4 Korean (Source Language) 돌과돌과돌이
[dolgwa dolgwa dori]
stone and stone and stone
끝없이 [kkeuteobsi]
endlessly
연달아 [yeondara]
connected Stone and stone and stone are endlessly connected
S P
Indonesian (Target Language)
The stones collide endlessly
S P
Based on the above data, it can be assumed that there is no significant difference between the source language and the target language. It can be seen that the grammatical functions in the source language consist of ‘S-P’. The subject is the noun phrase 돌과돌과돌이 (dolgwa dolgwa dori/stone and stone and stone), marked with the particle 이 (i). Then, the predicate is the verb phrase 끝없이 연달아 (kkeuteobsi yeondara/endlessly connected), indicated by the presence of a verb that indicates the action of the subject. Lee Juhaeng / 이주행 (2006).
In the target language, however, the subject is the noun phrase batu-batu (the stones) which indicates the experiencer, and the predicate is the adjective phrase berbenturan terus (collide endlessly), which indicates the action. Khairah dan Ridwan (2014). Thus, it can be concluded that the grammatical functions of the source language and the target language have no difference because they have the same grammatical functions.
Data Analysis 5
Table 5. Data 5 Korean (Source Language) 길은
[gireun]
the road
돌담을 [doldameul]
the stone wall
끼고 갑니다 [kkigo kamnida]
the road goes along
The road goes along the stone wall
S P O
Indonesian (Target Language) The road was surrounded
by
the stone wall
S P A
The data above shows a difference in the grammatical functions between the source language and the target language. In Korean, the grammatical functions consist of ‘S-P-O’. The subject is the experiencer in the form of the noun 길은 (gireun/the road), which is marked with the particle 은 (eun). The predicate is the verb 끼고 갑니다 (kkigo kamnida/goes along), which indicates the action of the subject 이주행 (2006). Then, the object is the noun phrase 돌담을 (doldameul/the stone wall), which is marked with the particle 을/를 (eul/reul).
However, in Indonesian, the grammatical functions consist of ‘S-P-O’, according to the theory by Khairah dan Ridwan (2014). The subject is the pronoun jalan (the road) as the experiencer. The predicate is the verb dilingkari (was surrounded by), which indicates the action received by the subject. Then, the adjunct is the noun phrase dinding batu (the stone wall).
Based on these data, a difference can be seen from a change in the source language data where there are objects that contain the noun phrase 돌담을 (doldameul/the stone wall). This phrase functions as the object because it refers to something that receives the action from the subject. In addition, another characteristic that can be seen in Korean grammatical functions is that the object can be recognized when the particle 을/를 (eul/reul) is attached. Then, the noun phrase 돌담을 (doldameul/the stone wall) as the subject is replaced with the noun phrase dinding baru (the stone wall) as the adjunct in Indonesian. This is because the phrase dinding batu (the stone wall) grammatically functions to describe the subject jalan (the road) which is at the beginning of the sentence.
Data Analysis 6
Table 6. Data 6 Korean (Source Language) 담은
[dam -eun]
was prot ecte d
쇠문을 [swe- mun- eul]
the iron gate
굳게
[gud- ge]
firml y
닫아
[dada]
closed
길 위에
[gil wi-e]
over the road
긴 [gin]
lon g
그림자를
[geurimj- areul]
shadows
드리우고
[deuri- ugo]
draping
The iron gate
was protect
ed
closed firmly over the road
draping long shadows
S P P A A P A
Indonesian (Target Language) The wall locked the iron
gate
forming long shadows
over the road
S P O P O A
It can be seen that there is a difference in grammatical functions between the source language and the target language. In Korean, the grammatical functions consist of ‘S-P-P-A-A-P-A’. As stated by Lee Juhaeng / 이주행 (2006), the subject is the noun phrase 쇠문을 (swemuneul/the iron gate), which is characterized by the use of the particle 을/를 (eul / reul). Then, the first predicate is the verb 담은 (dameun/protected) and the second predicate is the verb 닫아 (dada/closed) that indicate the actions received by the subject. The first adjunct is the adjective phrase 굳게 (gudge/firmly), characterized by the adverb particle 게 (ge) and the second adjunct is the noun phrase 길 위에 (gil wi-e/over the road) that indicates a place.
Then, the third predicate is the verb 드리우고 (euri-ugo/draping) that modifies the subject. Lastly, the adjunct is the noun phrase 긴 그림자를 (gin geurimjareul/long shadows).
Meanwhile, in Indonesian, the grammatical functions consist of ‘S-P-O-P-O- A’ with the explanation referred to the theory by Khairah dan Ridwan (2014) in which the noun dinding is the subject that indicates the actor. Then, the first predicate is the verb mengunci (locked) that indicates the action of the subject. The object is the noun phrase pintu besi (the iron gate), which indicates the receiver of the action done by the subject. The second predicate is the verb membentuk
(forming). The second object is the noun phrase bayangan panjang (long shadows).
Then, the adjunct is the noun phrase di atas jalan (over the road).
Based on these data, it can be seen that there are differences in grammatical functions, namely the changes in the subject 쇠문 (swemun/the iron gate) in the source language and the addition of the new noun dinding (the wall) in the target language. Besides, in the source language, the predicate is in the form of the verb 담은 (dameun/protected) and the adjunct is the adverb 굳게 (gudge/firmly). Meanwhile, those two grammatical functions are not present in the target language. This indicates that the meaning is simplified by the translator to make the line easier to understand. The last difference can be seen by the noun phrase 긴 그림자를 (gin geurimjareul/long shadows) as the adjunct, while in the target language this phrase functions as the object. This is because of the the modification of the previous predicate in the source language. The adjunct modifies the previous predicate which is in the form of the verb 드리우고 (deuri- ugo/draping). Meanwhile, the object bayangan panjang (long shadows) in the target language functions to explain that bayangan panjang is the target of the verb membentuk (forming).
Data Analysis 7
Table 7. Data 7 Korean (Source Language) 길은
[gireun]
the road
아침에서 저녁으로 [achim-eseo jeonyeokeuro]
from morning to evening
저녁에서 아침으로 [jeonyeok-
eso achimeuro]
from evening to
morning
통했습니다 [thonghaesseumnida]
passed through
(I) ø
pass through the road from morning to evening, from evening to morning
S A1 A2 P
Indonesian (Target Language) The road was passed
through
from morning to evening and from evening to morning
S P A
It can be seen that there is a difference between the source language and the target language. The grammatical functions in the source language consist of
‘Sø-A1-A2-P’. Meanwhile, the grammatical functions of the target language is ‘S-P-A’.
Based on the theory proposed by Lee Juhaeng / 이주행 (2006), in Korean, the subject ‘I’ is not explicitly stated. In Korean, the first adjunct is the verb 통했습니다 (thonghaesseumnida/pass through) that implicitly describes the action that the subject does. The second adjunct is in the form of the noun 길은 (gireun/the road) that modifies the predicate. Then, the predicate is the noun phrase 아침에서 저녁으로저녁에서 아침으로 (achim-eseo jeonyeokeuro, jeonyeok- eso achimeuro/from morning to evening, from evening to morning). Meanwhile, based on the theory by Khairah dan Ridwan (2014), the subject in Indonesian is the noun jalan (the road) that indicates the experiencer. Then, the predicate is the verb dilalui (was passed through), which indicates the receiver of the action. Lastly, the adjunct is the noun phrase dari pagi ke malam dan dari malam ke pagi (from morning to evening and from evening to morning) that indicates time.
Based on the above explanation, it can be assumed that the data in the target language has an additional subject jalan (the road) which is not present in the source language and that if there is a subject in the source language , the subject will be filled with the noun aku (I). The second difference is the predicate in the source language, which is in the form of the noun phrase 아침에서 저녁으로저녁에서 아침으로 (achim-eseo jeonyeokeuro, jeonyeok-eso achimeuro/from morning to evening, from evening to morning). This predicate changes into the noun phrase dari pagi ke malam dan dari malam ke pagi (from morning to evening and from evening to morning) and functions as the adjunct in the target language. This is because the predicate in the source language modifies the first adjunct 통했습니다 (honghaesseumnida/passed through) and the second adjunct which is the noun 길은 (gireun/the road). In the target language, however, the noun phrase dari pagi ke malam dan dari malam ke pagi (from morning to evening and from evening to morning) is the adjunct that modifies the predicate dilalui (was passed through).
Data Analysis 8
Table 8. Data 8 Korean (Source Language) 돌담을
[doldameul]
the stone wall
더듬어 [deodeumeo]
grope
눈물짓다 [nunmumjitda]
crying (I)
ø
grope the
stone wall
crying
S P O P Indonesian
(Target Language)
I grope the stone
wall
with cries
S P O A
The data above also shows a difference in the grammatical functions between the source language and the target language. The grammatical functions in the source language consist of ‘Sø-P-O-P’. Based on the theory by Lee Juhaeng / 이주행 (2006), the subject in the source language is not explicit. However, the subject actually describes the actor, which is the pronoun ‘I’. Meanwhile, the first predicate is the verb 더듬어 (eodeumeo/groping) as the action of the subject. Then, the object is the noun phrase 돌담을 (doldameul/the stone wall), which is marked with the particle 을/를 (eul/reul). The last grammatical function is the predicate in the form of verb 눈물짓다 (nunmumjitda/crying) as the action of the subject.
However, in Indonesian, the grammatical functions consist of ‘S-P-O-A’.
Referring to the theory by Khairah dan Ridwan (2014), the grammatical functions are comprised of the subject in the form of the noun aku (I) as the actor, the predicate in the form of the verb meraba (grope) as the action of the subject, the object in the form of the noun phrase dinding batu (the stone wall) as the target, and the adjunct in the form of the verbal phrase dengan tangisan (with cries) that describes the actor’s condition.
Based on the above explanation, it can be assumed that there is a difference found in the target language regarding the subject aku (I) that is not expressed explicitly in the source language. Another difference that can be seen is that in Korean, the second predicate contains the verb 눈물짓다 (nunmumjitda/crying), while in Indonesian, it turns into a verbal phrase dengan tangisan (with cries) functioning as the adjunct. This is because in the target language, the adjunct dengan tangisan (with cries) modifies the predicate merogoh (grope) and the object dinding batu (the the stone wall). Meanwhile, in the source language, the predicate 눈물짓다 (nunmumjitda/cried) describes the action done by the unspecified subject ‘I’.
Data Analysis 9
Table 9. Data 9 Korean (Source Language) 쳐다보면
[chyeodabomyeon]
If seeing
하늘은 [haneureun]
the sky
부끄럽게 [bukkeureobke]
with shame
푸릅니다.
[phureumnida]
blue If (I) see the sky
Ø
the sky with shame
becomes blue
S P O
Ø
S A P
Indonesian (Target Language)
Look up to the blue sky Feeling ashamed
P A P
It can be seen that there is a difference between the source language and the target language in terms of the grammatical functions. The grammatical functions in the source language consist of ‘S-P-Oø-S-A-P’. Based on the theory proposed by Lee Juhaeng / 이주행 (2006), in Korean, the subject ‘I’ is not explicitly stated. Then, the predicate is the verb 쳐다보면 (chyeodabomyeon/if seeing). Also, the object is not explicitly stated, which is the noun ‘sky’. Other grammatical functions include the subject in the form of the noun 하늘 (haneul/the sky) which is followed by the adjunct 부끄럽게 (bukkeureobke/with shame) which is characterized by the particle 게 (ge), and the second predicate which is an adjective 푸릅니다 (phureumnida/blue). Referring to the theory by Khairah dan Ridwan (2014), in Indonesian there is one predicate in the form of the verb menengadah (look up), which is followed by the noun phrase ke langit biru (to the sky) and another predicate in the form of an adjective phrase merasa malu (feeling ashamed).
Looking at the data above, it can be seen that the grammatical functions of the target language is simpler than those of the source language. This is because in the source language there is the subject 하늘 (haneul/the sky) that is not clearly stated in the target language. There is a difference in conveying the meaning of the line that in the source language, the subject is the noun 하늘 (haneul/the sky) that is modified by the phrase feeling ashamed. Meanwhile, in the source language, the phrase feeling ashamed modifies the subject I that is not clearly stated. This further causes a difference that can be seen in the target language where the adjunct in the source language is the adjective 부끄럽게 (bukkeureobke/with shame) that is used
to describe the subject 하늘 (haneul). Meanwhile, in the target language, merasa malu (feeling ashamed) is the second predicate that gives information about the adjunct ke langit biru (to the blue sky).
Data Analysis 10
Table 10. Data 10 Korean (Source Language) 풀
[phul]
the grass
한 포기 없는 [han phogi eobneun]
not a blade
이 [i]
this
길을 [gireul]
the road
걷는 것은 [geoneun geoseun]
walk
(I) ø
Walk on this road.
Not a blade of
grass
(That lives) ø
S Ø
P A S P
Indonesian (Target Language) I walk the barren
road
Not a blade of grass
that lives
P S O A
The data above also shows a difference in the grammatical functions between the source language and the target language. The grammatical functions in the source language consist of ‘Sø-P-A-S-Pø’. Based on the theory by Lee Juhaeng / 이주행 (2006), the subject in the source language is not clearly stated. However, the actor is implicitly known as ‘I’. The first predicate is the verb 걷는 것은 (eoneun geoseun/walk) as the action of the subject. This predicate is followed the the noun phrase 이 길을 (i gireul/on this road) as the adverb of place. Also, the subject in the form of the noun phrase 풀 한 포기 없는 (phul han phogi eobneun/not a blade of grass), which is not clearly followed by the predicate that lives.
However, according to the theory by Khairah dan Ridwan (2014), the grammatical functions consist of ‘P-S-O-A’ in Indonesian. The predicate is the verb kulalui (I walk). The subject is the noun phrase jalan gersang (the barren road) as the
experiencer. Then, the object is the noun phrase tak sehelai rumput (not a blade of grass) as the target. Then, the phrase yang hidup (that lives) functions as the predicate that shows the action of the object.
Based on the above explanation, it can be seen that the first subject in the target language is the noun phrase jalan gersang (the barren road), which is not expressed explicitly in the source language. Also, the adjunct in source language is the noun phrase 풀 한 포기 없는 (phul han phogi eobneun/not a blade of grass), while in the target language, the phrase functions as the object. Lastly, the adjunct in the target language is the phrase yang hidup (that lives), which is not expressed in the source language. Thus, it can be seen from the data that the expansion of meaning is performed in the target language.
Data Analysis 11
Table 11. Data 11 Korean (Source Language) 담 저쪽에
[dam jeojjok-e ] beyond the
stone
내가 [naega]
I am
남아 있는 [nama itneun]
left out
까닭이고 [kkadakigo]
awake
Because I am left out beyond that
stone
S P A
Indonesian (Target Language)
Once I look for myself that is
beyond the wall
S P O A
It can be seen that there is a difference between the source language and the target language. In Korean, the grammatical functions consist of ‘S-P-A’. As stated by Lee Juhaeng 이주행 (2006), the subject is the noun phrase 내가 까닭이고 (naega kkadalkigo/because I am) as the experiencer. Then, this subject is followed by the predicate in the form of the verb is the verb 남아 있는 (nama itneun/left out).
Lastly, the adjunct is the noun phrase 담 저쪽에 (dam jeojjok-e/beyond that stone), which is characterized by the particle 에 (e). Meanwhile, based on the theory by Khairah dan Ridwan (2014), the grammatical functions of the data in the target language consist of the subject in the form of the noun phrase begitu aku (once I) as the experiencer, which is followed by the predicate in the form of the verb mencari (look for). Then, the object is the pronoun diriku (myself) as the target, which is
followed by the adjunct in the form of the adjective phrase yang berada di balik dinding (that is beyond the wall) as the adverb of place.
The difference lies in the predicate in the source language in the form of the verb 남아 있는 (nama itneun/left out). However, the meaning of the word is broadened in the target language. The verb 남아 있는 (nama itneun/left out) is translated into mencari diriku (look for myself) that is comprised of the predicate mencari (look for) and the object diriku (myself). Therefore, it can be assumed that there is the expansion of meaning in the target language using the equivalent words or different expressions.
Data Analysis 12
Table 12. Data 12 Korean (Source Language) 내가
[naega]
I am
사는 것은 [saneun geoseun]
the inhabited
place
다만 [daman]
only
잃은 것을 [ireun geoseul]
the lost
찿는 [chatneun]
sought for
까닭입니다 [kkadalk-
imnida]
awake
Because I live Only to seek for the
lost
S P A
Indonesian (Target Language)
My life is only to seek for the lost.
S P O
The data above shows a difference between the source language and the target language. In Korean, the grammatical functions consist of ‘S-P-A’. Based on the theory by Lee Juhaeng / 이주행 (2006), the subject in the form of the noun phrase 내가 까닭입니다 (naega kkadalkimnida/because I) is the experiencer, which is characterized by the particle 가 (ga), and is followed by the predicate in the form of the verb 사는 것은 (saneun geoseun/live). This predicate is followed the adjunct in the form of the verbal phrase 다만 잃은 것을 찾는 (daman irheun geoseun chatneun/only to seek for the lost). Meanwhile, in Indonesian the grammatical functions consist of ‘S-P-O’. The subject is the noun hidupku (my life) as the experiencer, followed by the predicate in the form of the verb hanya mau mencari
(only to seek for) and the object in the form of the noun phrase apa yang telah hilang (what’s lost) as the target.
Thus, it can be seen that a difference is found between the source language and the target language. The difference lies in the adjunct that the source language has in the form of the verbal phrase 다만 잃은 것을 찾는 (aman irheun geoseun chatneun/only to seek for the lost) that modifies the predicate 사는 것은 (aneun geoseun/live). In Indonesian, however, the adjunct changes into the object in the form of the noun phrase apa yang telah hilang (what’s lost) that modifies the predicate hanya mau mencari (only want to seek for).
CONCLUSION
The phenomenon that can be observed in Indonesian society today is that people enjoy poetry that is not only in their mother tongue, but also in another language written by foreign writers whose works are then translated into Indonesian; one of which is Korean poetry. However, because poetry is a literary work that is difficult to be roughly translates, it is not uncommon in the translation process to add or subtract words in each stanza to avoid loss of meaning. Thus, the researchers compared between the grammatical functions of a poem in the source language and those in the target language, which very few researchers have done.
The comparison between the poem by Yun Dong Ju in Korean titled 길 (Gil) and that translated in Indonesian titled The Road found a total of 12 data of grammatical functions. It is also found that the most frequent occurrence is the addition of subjects in the target language that appears 4 times as shown in the data numbers 1, 3, 7, and 8. In addition to adding the subject, there is also the addition of the adjunct in the target language as shown in the data number 10.
Some data show changes in grammatical functions in which the adjunct in the source language is turned into an object in the target language. These cases are shown in the data numbers 6, 9, 10 and 12. Changes in grammatical functions also occur in the data number 5, where the object in the source language turn into an adjunct in the target language.
Apart from the addition and replacement of grammatical functions, some subjects are removed in the target language as shown in the data numbers 9 and 10.
Then, the data number 6 shows the removal of the predicate and the adjunct in the target language. In addition, there are differences in the content of grammatical functions between the source and target languages. In the data number 6, the content of the subject in the source language is different from that in the target language, and in the data number 11, the content of the predicate in the source language is different from that in the target language. Differences in the content of grammatical functions occur due to the influence of translation style as the translator tends to expand or restrict the meaning. Moreover, it is also found that some data do not change; one of which is shown in the data number 4 in which the grammatical structure and function are the same in both languages. Similarly, the data number 2 has the same grammatical function even though the structure is different.
Therefore, it can be concluded that the style of conveying meaning in the source language, which is Korean, has the tendency to obscure the actor. It is well understood that the poet is the actor in each verse of the poem. Thus, the lines tend to begin with a predicate or an adjunct. The addition and removal of grammatical functions in the target language aim to make the meaning of the poem conveyed in the target language easier to understand after the translator go through the translation process with various language styles. Therefore, it can be concluded that the grammatical functions found in the translated Yun Dong Ju’s poem titled 길 (Gil/The Road) by Chung Young Rim tend to be broader due to the expansion of meaning in the target language.
REFERENCES
Akbar, O. G. (2020). Perbandingan Variasi Struktur Sintaksis Bahasa Indonesia Dengan Bahasa Korea Dalam Terjemahan Buku “Cerita Kuno Indonesia- Korea 1” Karya Shin Young-Ji, DKK, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.
Alwi, H., et al. (2010). Tata bahasa baku bahasa Indonesia (ketiga). Jakarta: Balai Pustaka.
Chung., Y. R. (2007). Puisi Buat Rakyat Indonesia: Kumpulan Puisi 25 Penyair Korea.
Jakarta, Yayasan Obor Indonesia.
Di Pietro, R. J. (1968). Contrastive analysis and the notions of deep and surface grammar. Report of the Nineteenth Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies, Georgetown University Press.
Enggarwati, A. and A. P. Y. Utomo (2021). Fungsi, Peran, dan Kategori Sintaksis Bahasa Indonesia dalam kalimat Berita dan Kalimat Seruan pada Naskah Pidato Bung Karno 17 Agustus 1945." ESTETIK: Jurnal Bahasa Indonesia 4(1):
37-54.
Irbah, H. D. and dkk. (2020). Makna Asosiatif dalam Antologi Puisi 길 (Gil) Karya Yun Dong Ju: Sebuah Kajian Semantik. CaLLs 6 (II): 221-237.
James, C. (1998). Contrastive Analysis. London, Singapore, Longman.
Khairah, M. and S. Ridwan (2014). Sintaksis (Memahami Satuan Kalimat Perspektif Fungsi). Jakarta, Bumi Aksara.
Laila, A. (2016). Gaya Bahasa Perbandingan dalam Kumpulan Puisi Melihat Api Bekerja Karya M Aan Mansyur (Tinjauan Stilistika). Junal Gramatika 2: 146- 163.
Mahsun. (2005). Metode Penelitian Bahasa. Jakarta, PT Raja Grafindo Persada.
Moleong, L. J. (2017). Metode Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung, PT. Remaja Rosdakarya Offset.
Nazir, M. (2014). Metode Penelitian. Bogor, Ghalia Indonesia.
Nuryadi.(2012). Penerjemahan Puisi Heusca Kedalam Bahasa Indonesia oleh Chairil Anwar. Makna 3 (I): 82-95.
Sudaryanto.(2015). Metode dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa. Yogyakarta, Duta Wacana University.
Wardani, R. P. and A. P. Y. Utomo (2021). "Analisis Fungsi, Peran dan Kategori Sintaksis pada Opini “Vaksin Covid 19 Penahan Resesi” Oleh Sarman Simanjorang Dalam Koran Suara Merdeka " Jurnal Lingko 3 (I).
Yuniasti, H. (2019). "‘Potret Diri’ Melalui Semiotika Riffaterre: Puisi Jahwasang Karya Yoon Dongju." Bahasa & Seni 47 (II): 106-114.
권재일 .(1992). 한국어통사론. 서울, 민음사. 이주행. (2006). 한국어문법의이해. 서울, 月印.
