tranlation 2

TEXTUAL EQUIVALENCE: COHESION

Cohesion is the network of lexical, grammatical, and other relations which provide links between various parts of text. These relations or ties organize and, to some extent create a text, for instance by requiring the reader interpret words and expressions by reference to other words and expressions in the surrounding sentences and paragraphs. Cohesion is a surface relation; it connects together the actual words and expressions that we can see or hear.

Halliday and Hasan identify five main cohesive devices in English:

1. Reference

The term reference is traditionally used in semantics for the relationship which holds between a word and what it points to in the real world. In Halliday and Hasan’s model of cohesion, reference is used in a similar but more restricted way. Instead of denoting a direct relationship between words and extra-linguistic objects, reference is limited here to the relationship of identity which holds between two linguistic expressions. Reference is a divice which allows the reader/hearer to trace participants, entities, event, etc. in the text. One of the common patterns of establishing chains of reference in English and a number of other languages is to mention a participant explicitly in the first instance, for example by name of title, and then use a pronoun to refer back to the same participant in the immediate context. Another type of reference relation which is not strictly textual is that of co-reference. Co-reference can be incorporated somewhere around the repetition/synonym level of the continuum if we decide to adopt a more flexible notion of reference for our current purposes.

For example:

• A duck swam in the pool. When I caught, it flapped its wings.  (it / its refers to A duck)
• Budi’s mother sings with her friends. She looks happy. (She / her refers to mother)
• Yudi’s sister called him with his short name.  (him / his refers to Yudi)
• There are some roses in the garden. They are blooming.  (they refers to roses)
• Maria lost her money. This made her sad. (this refers to lost her money)
• Mimin sometimes cries in the night. I am often afraid of that. (that refers to cries in the night)
• The beach is now in disorder. We never go there anymore.  (there refers to the beach)

2.  Substitution and ellipsis

Unlike reference, substituation and elipsis are grammatical rather than semantic relationship. In substitutation, an item (or items) is replaced by another item (or items):

I like movies.

And i do.

Ellipsis involves the omission of an item. In other word in ellipsis, an item is replaced by nothing. This is a case of leaving something unsaid which the hearer or reader has to supply missing information, but only those  cases where the grammatical structure itself points to an item or items that can fill the slot  in question. Example:

~ joan brought some carnations, and Catherine some sweet peas. (ellipted item: brought  in seecond  clause)

~here are thirteen cards. Take any. Now give me any three. (ellipted items: card after anyin second clause and  cards after any three in third clause)

~have you been swimming? Yes  i have. (ellipted items: been swimming I second clause)

Halliday and Hasan give a detailed description of several types of substituation and ellipsis in english. Since substituation and  ellipsis are purely grammatical relation which hold between linguistic forms rather then between  lingustic  forms and their meanings, the details are highly language-specific and  are therefore not worth going into here.

Note that the  boundar  lies  between  the three types of cohesive deice  (reference, substitustion, and ellipsis) are not clear cut. Hoey (1991) gives the following example. A  quetion such as Does Aghata sing in the bath?  May elicit three answer, of which answer:

(a)  No, but I do

(b) Yes, she does

(c) Yes, she does it to annoy us, I think

3. CONJUNCTION

Conjunction involves the use of formal markers to relate sentences, clauses and paragraphs to each other. Unlike reference, subtitution, and ellipsis, the use of conjunction does not instruct the reader to supply missing information either by looking for it elsewhere in the text or by filling structural slots. Instead, conjunction signals the way the writer wants the reader to relate what is about to be said to what has been said before. Conjunction expresses one of a small number of general relations. The main relations are summarized below, with examples of conjunctions which can or typically realize each relation.

a.       Additive: and, or, also, in addition, furthermore, besides, similarly, likewise, by contrast, for instance;

b.      Adversative: but, yet, however, instead, on the other hand, nevertheless, at any rate, as a matter of fact;

c.       Causal: so, consequently, it follows, for, because, under the circumstances, for this reason;

d.      Temporal: then next, after that, on another occasion, in conclusion, an hour later, finally, at last;

e.       Continuatives (miscellaneous): now, of course, well, anyway, surely, after all.

A number of points need to be borne in mind here. First, the same conjunction may be used to signal different relations, depending on the context. Second, these relations can be expressed by a variety of means; the use of a conjunction is not the only device for expressing a temporal or causal relation. Third, conjunctive relations do not just reflect relations between external phenomena, but may also be set up to reflect relations which are internal to the text or communicative situation.

Adjusting patterns of conjunctionin line with target-languange general and specific text-type preferences is less straightforward than adjusting patterns of reference. The problem with conjunction is that it reflects the rhetoric of a text and controls its interpretation. This suggests that adjustments in translation will often affect both the content and the line of argumentation.

Apart from questions of naturalness, accuracy, and the ‘logic’ of a text, there are sometimes stylistic considerations which may make the translation of conjunctions particularly difficult. For instance, Milic (1970), suggests that one of the most striking features of Jonathan Swift’s style relates to the way he uses conjunction. Swift’s fovourite conjunctions, according to Milic, are and,but, and for. He apparently makes ‘unusually heavy use’ of these items ( Milic;1970:246).

4. Lexical Cohesion 

Lexical Cohesion refers to the role played the selection of vocabulary in organizing relations within a text. A given lexical item cannot be said to have a cohesive function, but any lexical item can enter into a cohesive relation with other item in a text.

Halliday and Hasan divide lexical cohesion into two main categories: reiteration and collocation. Reiteration, as the name suggests, involves repetition of lexical items. A reiterated item may be a repetition of an earlier item, a synonym or near-synonym, a superordinate, or general word. In this sense, it represents the same with the exception of pronominal reference. 
            A reiteration is not the same reference, however, because it does not necessarily involve the same identity. If the above sentence is followed by a statement such as `girls can be ugly`, the repetition of girl => girls would be still bean instance of reiteration even though the two items would not be referring to the same individual.      
            Collocation, as a subclass of lexical cohesion in halliday and hasan model, covers any instance which involves a pair of lexical items that are associated with each other in the language in some way. The notion of lexical cohesion as being a dependent on the presence of networks of lexical items rather than the presence of any specific class or type of item is important.

For example:
There is a boy climbing that tree.
The boy is going to fall if he doesn't take care. (repetition)
The lad's going to fall if he doesn't take care. (synonym)
The child's going to fall if he doesn't take care. (superordinate)
The idiot's going to fall if he doesn't take care. (general word)

Translation

Equivalence at Word Level

A.    The Word in Different Language

1.      What is a word?

The smallest unit which we would expect to possess individual meaning is the word. Defined loosely, the word is ‘the smallest unit of languange that can be used by itself’. (Bolinger and Sears, 1968:43).

2.      Is there a one-to-one relationship between word and meaning?

There is a one-to-one relationship between word and meaning, because a little adding bound morpheme in the word can make that word has different meaning. For example:

In English; between word write  and writing

--even they have basic word “write” but they have different meaning, write is a verb, and writing can be a verb as participle and can be a noun (gerund).

3.      Introducing morphemes

Morpheme to describe the minimal formal element of meaning in languange, as distinct from word, which may or may not contain several elements of meaning. There are two kind of morpheme, and they are bound morpheme and free morpheme. Bound morpheme cannot stand alone, it need free morpheme to make it has a meaning, in other hand free morpheme can stand alone and it can call as word.

Example: bound morpheme: (for plural form)

                        --cakes -> cake + s (bound morpheme)

                                                Cake: free morpheme

2. Lexical Meaning

The lexical meaning of a word or lexical unit may be thought of as the specific value it has in a particular linguistic system and the ‘personality’ it acquires through usage within that system. According to Cruse, we can distinguish four main types of meaning in words and utterances (utterances being stretches of written or spoken text):

1.      Propositional vs Expressive meaning

The propositional meaning of a word or an utterance arises from the relation between it and what it refers to or describes in a real or imaginary world, as conceived by the speakers of the particular languange to which the word or utterance belongs. This type, we can judge an utterance as true or false. For example: when people said “skirt” someone can imagine how the form of it and where it can be wore.

Expressive meaning cannot be judged as true or false. This is because expressive meaning relates to the speakers feelings or attitude rather than to what words and utterances refer to. For example: when people said “you are bad” and “you are very bad”, these clauses have same purpose but different in meaning level.

2.      Presupposed meaning

a.      Selectional restrictions: these are a function of the propositional meaning of a word. For example: in Bahasa we can say “laki-laki for male for human, and jantan for male for animal.

b.      Collocational restrictions: these are semantically arbitrary restrictions which do not follow logically from the propositional meaning of a word. For example: “back off” in English means “mundur”  in Bahasa

3.      Evoked meaning

Evoked meaning arises from dialect and register variation. A dialect is a variety of languange which has currency within a specific community or group of speakers. Register is a variety of languange that a languange user considers appropriate to a specific situation. Register variation arises from variations in the following:

1.      Field of discourse: This is an abstract term for ‘what is going on’ that is relevant to the speakers choice of linguistic items. For example: talking about biologist that we expert or participate in it.

2.      Tenor of discourse: An abstract term for the relationship between the people taking part in the discourse. Again, the languange people use varies depending on such interpersonal relationships as mother/child, doctor/patient, or superior/inferior in status. For example: if we make translation from a book of a teacher, we must put our position as that teacher, we can’t change any idea in her/his book as teacher to our idea as student.

3.      Mode of discourse: An abstract term for the role that the languange is playing (speech, essay, lecture, instructions) and for its medium of transmission (spoken, written). Linguistic choices are influenced by these dimensions. For example: Word in a speech “the honorable” in English letter means “yang terhormat” in Bahasa.

3. The Problem of Non-Equivalence

1. Semantic Fields and Lexical Sets- the Segmentation of Experience

The words of a language often reflect not so much the reality of a language as a set of words referring to a series of conceptual fields. Limitation aside, there are two main areas in which an understanding of semantic fields and lexical sets can be useful to a translator.

a)        Appreciating the value that a word has in a given system; and

b)        Developing strategies for dealing with non-equivalence.

2. Non-equivalence at word level and some common strategies for dealing with it

1)      Common problems of non-equivalence

(a)   Culture specific concepts

The source language word may express a concept in the target culture. The concept in a question may be abstract or concrete; it may be relate to a religious belief, a social custom, or even a type of food. Such concepts are often referred to as `culture specific`. 

(b)   The source language concept is not lexicalized in the target language

The source language word may express a concept which is known in the target culture but simply not lexicalized, that is not allocated a target language word to express it.

(c)    The source language word is semantically complex

The source language word maybe semantically complex. This is a fairly common problem in translation. Words do not have to be morphologically complex to be semantically complex. In other words, a single word which consist of a single morpheme can sometimes express are more complex set of meanings than s whole sentence

(d)   The source and target language make different distinctions in meaning

The target language may make more or fewer distinctions in meaning than the source language. What one language regards as an important distinction in meaning another language may not perceive as relevant.

(e)    The target language lacks a superordinate

The target language may have specific words but no general word to head the semantic field. Rusian has no ready equivalent for facilities, meaning any equipment, building, services that are provided for a particular activity or purpose.

(f)    The target language lacks a specific term (hyponym)

More commonly, languages tend to have general words but lack specific ones since each language makes only those distinctions in meaning which seem relevant to its particular environment.

(g)   Differences in physical or interpersonal perspective

Physical perspective maybe of more importance in one language than it is in another. Physical perspective has to do with where things or people are in relation to one other or to a place, as expressed in pairs of words such as come/go, take/bring.

(h)   Differences in expressive meaning

Differences in expressive meaning are usually more difficult to handle when the target language equivalent is more emotionally loaded than the source item. This is often the case with items which relate to sensitive issues such as religion, politics and sex.

(i)     Differences in form

There is often no equivalent in the target language for a particular form in the source text.

(j)     Differences in frequency and purpose of using specific forms

English, for instance, uses the continuous ing form for binding clauses much more frequently,than other languages which have equivalents for it.

(k)   The use of loan words in the source text

English, are often used for their prestige value, because they can add an air of sophistication to the text or its subject matter. 

2)      Strategies used by profesional translation

(a)   Translation by a more general word (superordinate)

This the commonest strategy for dealing with many types of non-equivalence,  particulary in the area of the propositional meaning. For example:

Source text (English) make a translation from one product Body Lotion ZAITUN – “non-sticky texture” , target text (Bahasa): ”tidak lengket”.

(b)   Translation by a more neutral/ less expressive word

Source text: The panda’s mountain home is rich in plant life ...

If we translate the word “home” in that sentence into Bahasa we can translate it as “habitat”.

(c)    Translation by cultural substituation

This strategy involves replacing a culture-specific item or expression with a target-language item which does not have the same propositional meaning but is likely to have similiar impact on the target reader. For example:

Source text (English): dinner, word dinner in Indonesia usually refers to “makan malam” but actually dinner in English means “makan makanan utama/pokok (not junk food)” seperti makan nasi di Indonesia.

(d)   Translation using a loan word or loan word plus explanation

This strategy is particularly common in dealing with culture-specific items, modern concepts, and buzz words. Once explained, the loan word can then be used on its own; the reader can understand it and is not distracted by further lengthy explanations. For example:

Source text (English): dinner, kata dinner di terjemahkan oleh translator dan dijelaskan secara rinci ke dalam bahasa target, seperti dinner adalah….

(e)    Translation by paraphrase using a related word

This strategy tends to be used when the concept expressed by the source item is lexicalized in the target language but in a different form, and when the frequency with which a certain form is used in the source text is significantly higher than would be natural in the target language. For example:

Source text: This food taste so crunchy, target text (Bahasa): makanan ini rasanya sangat garing. Or home stay/villa means penginapan.

(f)    Translation by paraphrase using unrelated words

If the concept expressed by the source item is not lexicalized at all in the target language, the paraphrase strategy can still be used in some contexts. Instead of related word, the paraphrase may be based on modifying a super ordinate or simply on unpacking the meaning of the source item, particularly if the item in question is semantically complex. For example: Source text (Indonesia): word “galau”  it can translate into English as a feeling for someone who has confuse in choosing something or word for someone who is in feeling blue.

(g) Translation by omission

This strategy may sound rather drastic, but in fact it does no harm to omit translating a word or expression in some contexts. For example:

Source text: many herbal plants gave us many advantages..

Target text( Bahasa): tanaman herbal mempunyai banyak jenis yang memiliki banyak manfaat.

(h) Translation by illustration

This is a useful option if he word which lacks an equivalent in the target language refers to a physical entity which can be illustrated, particularly if there are restrictions on space and if the text has to remain short, concise, and to the point. For example: label halal in every food in Indonesia can be translate that the food is allow to consume by Muslim.