Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
INTRODUCTION
The translation work is very important in transmitting culture, revitalizing language,
interpreting texts, diffusing knowledge, suggesting the relationship between thought and
language, and in contributing towards understanding between nations. In addition, the
translated text has enriched the intellectual life in the target communities; it has sometime
introduced new linguistic structure or new genres into the target language. However, on
the discouraging face, translation work is inconvenient and difficult from the first place a
translator begins his work. The difficulties lie on making decision on which principle
refers to; whether the translation should incline to the source or target language; to be
faithful or beautiful, literal or free, and whether to attempt and struggle for the form or the
content. Among the potential areas of translation problems, the translation of idioms and
1
throughout the world. It is, by far, the best known, most studied, and most respected
English translation of the Qur'an. It was the monumental and authoritative work of its
kind and it subsequently inspired many such similar endeavors. The eloquent poetic style
of the translation and the authenticity of the extensive commentaries and explanatory
notes, have, no doubt, contributed greatly to its much deserved reputation as the English
translation of the meaning of the Qur'an. The tremendous impact that this work has made
upon the English-reading Muslims (as well as, many non-Muslims) of the world, has
never been greater than it is today and shall continue-insha'a Allah (Allah willing)-for
generations to come. It has enabled interested readers of English, who do not have a
proficiency in reading and comprehending Qur'anic Arabic, to greatly enrich their
understanding of the meaning and the incomparable beauty and perfection of the Glorious
Qur'an. It has given them a more authentic and reliable translation and commentary from
which they could make a serious study.
THEORY OF TRANSLATION
In general, translation is a process of switching or replacing a text from one
language (Source Language or SL) to another language (Target Language or TL). The
following are several meaning of translation defined by translation experts. According to
Brislin (1976:1), translation is the general term referring to the transfer of thoughts and
ideas from one language (source) to another (target), whether the language are in written
form or oral form. Compared with the general definition above, Brislin has given to
additional terms that have made the definition more specific, namely that translating
involves the switch or change of thoughts or ideas from one language to another, and that
this switching or changing process may be done in both written and oral form. Catford
(1965:20) defined translation as the replacement of textual material in one language
(source language) by an equivalent in another language. According to Newmark
(1981:7), translation is a craft consisting in the attempt to replace a written message and
3
Target Language
Analysis
Restructuring
Text Content in SL
Transfer
Text Content in TL
referentialists and descriptivists respectively). However, many language experts have seen
serious points of both these views.
The referentialist or Comparison views perhaps have been settled by Quintilian
since long time ago, and up the present time are still developed by later supporters like
Henle (1958), Mooij (1976), and Fogelin (1988) (Leezenberg 2001:71). It is not easy to
say that before the Quintilian time there was not any study about metaphor. In fact, there
was a study of it by Quintilian predecessor, Aristotle, in his Rhetoric and Poetics
(Mooij 1976:64). Aristotle defined metaphor as consisting of giving a thing a name that
belongs to something else; the transference being either from genus to species, or from
species to genus, or from species to species, or on ground of analogy. His theory of
metaphor, Mooij furthers, is considered to hold substitution view, the view of which has
not received wide and endured plausibility by his successors who instead have developed
comparison theory of metaphor which have wider and have endured longer plausibility.
Therefore, the writer doesnt elaborate such view (substitution view) in his description of
metaphor.
The referentialist or comparison views have several distinct characteristics in
regards to metaphor analysis (Leezenberg 2001:71-73) which can be summarized as the
following. First, they all stress a close correspondence between metaphor and simile or
comparison, or claiming that the meaning of metaphor is equal to that of a corresponding
simile. The view of metaphor as an elliptical simile suggests the equation of the literal
meaning of a metaphor with that of simile, while the other suggests for identifying its
figurative meaning to the literal meaning. Look at, for example, the metaphor like
(1) Man is a wolf
This sentence is held to assert not that man is a wolf, but at most that man is like a wolf.
c) Sense
d) Metaphor
Then, by applying these terms, Newmarks suggests the procedures for translating
metaphors as the following.
1) A translator may reproduce the same image in the target language if the image
has comparable frequency and currency in the appropriate register. This procedure
is common for one-word metaphors, such as ray of hope becoming sinar
harapan and sunny smile becoming senyum cerah.
2) A translator may replace the image in the source language with a standard
target language image which does not clash with the target language culture and
popular to most readers. For example, an idiom a wolf in sheeps clothing may be
substituted by a standard target language (Indonesian) metaphor musang berbulu
ayam, and sitting on a bad lettuce may be translated as duduk di atas bara,
and when in Rome do what Romans do may be translated as dimana bumi
dipijak disitu langit dijunjung.
3)
A translator may translate the metaphor by simile for retaining the image.
This is the obvious way of modifying a metaphor, particularly if the target
language text is not emotive in character. This procedure can be used to modify
any type of metaphor, simple or complex one. Thus the expression Sam is a pig
may be translated as a simile in Indonesian Sam seperti seekor babi.
10
translator
Allah hath set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing, and on their eyes is a veil;
great is the penalty they (incur).(2:7)
In their hearts is a disease;
It is not required of thee (O Messenger), to set them on the right path,
but Allah sets on the right path whom He pleaseth. Whatever of good
ye give benefits your own souls, and ye shall only do so seeking
the
In this strategy, the translator has adopted or reproduced the image of the original
metaphors to the target language text. This strategy is aimed to keep the originality,
because the image of the original metaphor has comparable frequency and currency in the
TL context. It is referentially faithful to the original and contextually acceptable in the TL
text. The translator may have used this strategy in the consideration that the metaphor is
11
of original or fresh type. Such metaphor type has strong expensive and aesthetic linguistic
power. Therefore, the translator has striven to translate it equivalently expressive and
aesthetic in TL text, namely by adopting or reproducing the same metaphorical image in
the translation. Some reader of the translation may find such language difficult, but it is
not impossible to understand, and therefore, acceptable.
They say, "Our hearts are the wrappings (which preserve Allah's Word:
we need no more)."
has
survived
the
original
metaphor
and
made
the
12
To Allah belong the east and the west: Whithersoever ye turn, there is
the presence of Allah. For Allah is all-Pervading, all-Knowing. (2:115)
In this verse, the word
into
13
translated in some strategies. In term of categories of semantic field they are also
translated in some strategies. For example the face of Alloh which belong to Being in
the categories of semantic field is translated into the presence of Alloh in verse 115
( M-P) and in verse 272 it is translated into the face of Alloh (M-M) and the word
face related to human is translated into His whole self in verse 112 (M-P). The
number of strategy of reproducing the same image in the target language or the
translator reproduced the image of metaphor in SL text into TL text (M-M) dominated
in the translators strategy in translating metaphor. It is probably aimed to keep the
originality of metaphors in the consideration that the metaphor is of original or fresh
type. Such a metaphor type has strong expensive and aesthetic linguistic power.
(2) The translator reproduced the image of metaphor in SL text into TL
text plus sense. The translator retained the metaphor and added the
sense (M-M+P). There two verses represented this strategy. The
translator used this strategy probably is aimed to keep the originality
of metaphor, but to make the readers understand the meaning, the
translator added literal word as described in verse 88 and 93.
Because if the translator didnt add the literal word or sense in that
metaphor will misunderstood the meaning of the verse. So, to avoid
misunderstanding the translator added literal word in metaphor.
(3) The translator replaced the image of metaphor in SL with sense or
literal phrase in TL (M-P). There are four verses (112, 115, 138 &
207). In this strategy the translator didnt translate the metaphor
into metaphor, but he changed or reproduced the metaphor into
literal phrase as in verse 112 the word wajhahu is translated into
his whole self, the word wajhullohi is translated into the presence
of Alloh, the word shibghatallah is translated into the baptism of
14
Alloh, and the word yasyri nafsahu is translated into gives his life.
The translator used this strategy may aim to make the meaning
clear. Based on the data collection and data analysis, the translator
used the strategies depending on the context of the verses.
Finally, the translators, whose task is to produce a TL text that bears a close
resemblance to the SL text, should be aware of cognitive and cultural issues when
translating from Arabic into English or vice-versa. Therefore, it is not enough for
translators to be bilingual, but they should be bicultural as well. Because translators suffer
twice when approaching some metaphors which are cultur-bound and due to their
figurative meaning intralingualy, it is recommended that translators be trained in coping
with metaphor translation not only in foreign-language programs, but also in their native
language. Sometimes, even native speakers are not always able to comprehend the
figurative meaning of messages in their own language.
REFERENCES
Ary, Donald, Jacobs, Lucy, & Razavieh, Asghar. 2002. Introduction to Research in
Education. Belmont: Wadsworth.
Al-Hilali, Muhammad T, & Khan, Muhammad M. 1985. Translation of the meanings of
the Noble Quran: In the English Language. Madinah: King Fahd Complex for the
printing of the Holy Quran.
Ali, Abdullah Y. 2001. The Holy Quran Translation. New Delhi: Goodword Books.
Al-Shabuni, Ali. 1976. Shafwat Al-Tafasir: Tafsir li Al Qurlan Al-Kariem. Beirut: Dar Al
Fikr.
Al-Suyuthi, Jalal ad-Din. 1935. Al-Itqan fi Ulum Al Quran. Beirut: Dar Al Fikr.
15
Ibnu Katsir, Imam Abu Al Fidaa. 770 H. Tafsir Al Quran Al Adhim. Beirut: Daar Al Fikr
Lakoff, George, & Johnson, Mark. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Larson, Mildred N. 1984. Meaning-Based Translation: A Guide to Cross-Language
Equivalence. Boston: University Press of America, Inc.
Leezenberg, Michiel. 2001. Context of Metaphor. Boulevard: Elsevier Science Ltd.
Malkmkjer. Kristen. 1998. Translation and Language Teaching. Manchester: St. Jerome
Publishing.
Newmark, Peter. 1988. Approaches to Translation. London: Prentice Hall.
Newmark, Peter. 1988. A Textbook of Translation. London: Prentice Hall
Nida, Eugene, A., & Taber, Charles R. 1982. The Theory and Practice of Translation.
Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Nida, Eugene, A. 2001. Contexts in Translating. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing
Company.
Pedoman Penulisan Karya Ilmiah. 2003. Malang: Percetakan Universitas Negeri Malang.
Suryawinata, Zuchridin & Hariyanto, Sugeng. 2003. Translation: Bahasan Teory dan
Penuntun Praktis Menerjemahkan. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Kanisius.
Wahab, Abdul. 1991. Isu Linguistik: Pengajaran Bahasa dan Sastra. Surabaya: Airlangga
University Press.
Wahab, Abdul. 1986. Javanese Metaphors in Discourse Analysis. Unpublished
Dissertation. Urbana: University of Illinois.
17
18
19
20
21