Equivalence in Translation

Equivalence in Translation

INDAH LESTARI

[email protected]

SarMag Program, Faculty of Letters, English Department

Gunadarma University

2013

ABSTRACT

mailto:[email protected]

INTRODUCTION

Finding the equivalence in target language that reflects the meaning of source lan-

guage text is what translation about. The essence of translation is to convey the message of

source language (SL) into target language (TL). Basically, translating is producing the equiv-

alence in target language (TL) which naturally has closest meaning of source language (SL)

message by prioritizing the meaning rather than the style (Nida and Taber, 1979). First, the

translator must head for produce the message not the sameness the text between SL and TL.

To achieve this purpose, the translator must master the text.

However, finding precise equivalence is not easy. Even Larson (1989, p 159) stated

that there will no exact equivalence between SL and TL because of the culture of SL is differ-

ent with TL’s. In consequence, translators have to find strategies to convey the meaning of

SL into TL.

The problem of equivalence becomes focus for most experts of translation. These ex-

perts have different perspective in viewing equivalence in translation. Some of them focus on

source-oriented translation; others focus on target-oriented translation, the rest focus on lin-

guistics-oriented translation. Accordingly, each expert has different strategies to solve the

problem of equivalence which are beneficial to be used by translators.

This study discusses about the definition, types and techniques of equivalence of

translation from some experts’ point of view. This study provides some examples and its ex-

planation for further understanding of equivalence.

EQUIVALENCE IN TRANSLATION

Many experts have discussed about the problem of equivalence in translation. They

have different opinion and perspectives in view this problem. The following section explores

the point of view of some experts in translation and the strategy used in solving the problem.

1. Types of Equivalence

1.1. Roman Jacobson

He introduced the notion of ‘equivalence in difference’. He suggest of three

kinds of translation (1959, p.233):

1.1.1. Intralingual

It is equivalence within a language. It is variations of the language itself. On the

other hand, intralingual is rewording or paraphrase. The translator makes use of syn-

onyms in order to get the ST message conveyed e.g. the translation of one dialect into

others or a dialect into formal form or otherwise. In Java, krama form of language is

translated into krama inggil form of language, In Sundanese, kasar language is translated

into lemes language.

Source text (Krama, polite

level of Javanese lan-

guage)

Target text (Krama inggil,

the most polite level of Ja-

vanese language)

Meaning in Indonesian

Maringi Nyaosi Memberi

Both Maringi and Nyaosi mean member, however these words are used in differ-

ent polite level of Javanese language.

1.1.2. Interlingual

A translation occurs in transferring meaning of a language into other lan-

guages with their equivalences e.g. the translation of English text into Indonesian text.

Source text (English) Target text (Indonesian)

I love you. Aku cinta kamu.

1.1.3. Intersemiotic

It is a translation of a sign system of message into another sign system such as

transferring the form of poetry into song, or a story in a novel into a movie or other

forms. For example, the movie of Laskar Pelangi is created by adapting the novel

with the same title.

1.2. Nida and Taber

Nida and Taber stated that translation is purposed to convey meaning, not to

find the similarity of ST and TT. Nida and Taber coined 2 methods of equivalence.

Those are formal and dynamic equivalence.

1.2.1. Formal equivalence

It is also known as word for word translation which focuses attention on the

message itself, in both form and content. It consists of a TL item which represents the

closest equivalence of a SL word or phrase. The formal equivalence takes the words

that are written in source texts and translates them into target text and leave the reader

to interpret or apply the text e.g. the translation of Holy book.

1.2.2. Dynamic equivalence

Some expert call it sense for sense translation is based upon the principle of

equivalent effect. It is a translation principle according to which a translator seeks to

translate the meaning of the original in such a way that the TL wording will trigger

the same impact on the original wording did upon the SL audience. Its main objective

is to translate based on what the author’s intended message was.

1.3. House

There are two types of equivalence which are discussed by House;

1.3.1. Overt equivalence,

TL audience is not directly addressed and there is therefore no need at all to

attempt to recreate a second original since an overt translation must overtly be a trans-

lation.

1.3.2. Covert equivalence

The production of a text is functionally equivalent to the ST. House also ar-

gues that in this type of translation the ST is not specifically addressed to a TL audi-

ence.

1.4. Mona baker

Baker (1992) defined four kinds of equivalence as follows:

1.4.1. Equivalence at word level means the meaning of single word or expres-

sions. For example indah in Indonesian word is translated into beautiful in

English.

1.4.2. Equivalence above word level means the meaning of word when com-

bined with other word to form stretches of language. Collocation and idiom

are part of this kind equivalence. For example, what a lovely vacation. It’s

a shame that we must draw it to a close we have to end the vacation.

The draw it to a close has different meaning if the words investigated one

by one, however it means end when they are combined each other. It is

called idiom.

Collocation is a pair of word. For example, I picked up a really good bar-

gain in the market. The word bargain is collocated with picked up.

1.4.3. Grammatical equivalence is used when referring to the diversity of gram-

matical categories across languages. There are some problems in grammati-

cal equivalence such as gender, person, tense and aspect which different

with another language. For example, she is sick dia sakit. She is trans-

lated into dia. In English, the gender of the one belongs to she is obviously;

female, while in Indonesian, there is no lexical which show the different

gender of third person. This language has just one word to refer third singu-

lar person: dia.

1.4.4. Textual equivalence is used when referring to the equivalence between a

SL text and a TL text in terms of information and cohesion. Theme and

rheme are part of this kind of equivalence. Theme is what the clause about.

It consists of time or place, object or complement predicator.

1.4.5. Pragmatic equivalence is the way utterances are used in communicative

situations and the way we interpret them in context. This equivalence con-

sists of coherence and implicature. For example, I like the sky today. It is

clear and blue. It in the text is the coherence of the sky; “What’s your name

boy?”Asked the policeman. The raises tone when we asked a question is

implicate more clearly more than is actually said.

1.5. Catford

Catford preference is a more linguistic-based approach to translation. He intro-

duced the concepts of types and shifts of translation. The types of translation is based

on 3 criteria,

1. The extent of translation

2. The grammatical rank at which the translation equivalence is established.

3. The levels of language involved in translation.

There are two main types of translation shift.

1.5.1. Level shift

The different equivalence of linguistic level between SL and TL means level

shifts as a shift from grammatical unit in SL to a lexical unit in TL. For instance, in case

of English and Bahasa Indonesia, a grammatical unit in English (i.e. affix, noun, verb,

etc) has lexical unit in Bahasa Indonesia (2000, p.141).

1.5.2. Category shift; there are 4 types of this shift:

1.5.2.1. Structure shift

It involves grammatical change of the structure between SL and TL. For exam-

ple, White House Gedung Putih; the position of white (putih) in English is placed at

the back of house (gedung). This shift happens because of the difference of grammar

rules of both SL and TL. If in English grammar the adjective placed at the front of the

noun, then in Bahasa Indonesia, the adjective is placed at the back of the noun.

1.5.2.2. Class-shift

Grammatical class change between SL and TL, e.g. a verb may be translated

into noun. For example, I get bored watching the movie Aku bosan menonton film

itu. Get bored, verb in English is translated into adjective bosan in Bahasa Indonesia.

1.5.2.3. Unit-shift

It is used in mean to change the rank-that is departures from formal correspon-

dence in which the translation equivalent of a unit at one rank in the SL is a unit at a dif-

ferent rank in the TL. ‘Rank’ here refers to the hierarchical linguistic units of sentence,

clause, group, word and morpheme” (1965, p.79). For example, Today is a beautiful

day Hari ini adalah hari yang indah. A word of today is translated into a phrase hari

ini in Bahasa Indonesia.

1.5.2.4. Intra-system shift

It is used for those cases where the shift occurs internally, within a system; that

is for those cases where SL and TL possess systems which approximately correspond

formally as to their constitution, but when the translation involves selection of a non-

corresponding term in the TL system. For example, Cans kaleng-kaleng. The plural

form of SL is translated into reduplication in TL.

There are two types of equivalence by Catford; formal equivalence and textual

equivalence (1965, pp.27-28)

1.5.3.1. Formal equivalence

It is TL category (unit, class, element of structure, etc) which can be said to oc-

cupy as nearly as possible the ‘same’ place in the economy of the TL as the given SL

category occupies in the SL.

1.5.3.2. Textual equivalence

It is any TL text or portion of text which is observed on a particular occasion to

be the equivalent of a given SL text or portion of text.

1.6. Popovic

Popovic distinguishes four types of equivalence (1998, p32)

1.6.1. Linguistic equivalence, where there is sameness on the linguistic level of both

SL and TLtexts.

1.6.2. Paradigmatic equivalence, where there is equivalence of ‘the elements of

paradigmatic expressive axis

1.6.3. Stylistic equivalence, where there is functional equivalence of elements in

both original and tanslation aiming at an expressive identity with an invariant

of identical meaning.

1.6.4. Textual equivalence, where there is equivalence of the syntagmatic structuring

of a text.

1.7. Mildred L. Larson

Larson introduces two types of lexical equivalence; those are known concept

equivalence and unknown concept equivalence.

1.7.1. Known concept equivalence is defined as the words which have lexical equiv-

alence in target language. E.g. Rose mawar. The concept of the flower is

known both in ST and TT.

1.7.2. Unknown concept equivalence refers to the word which has no lexical equiva-

lence in TT. E.g. Badik Dagger. Badik is a traditional weapon used in Su-

lawesi. The form of badik is like a dagger with the point turning down and the

holder is made from wood. This word is generally translated into dagger in

English.

B. Technique

B.1. Molina and Albir

Molina and Albir develop 20 techniques which can be used to analyze and clas-

sifies the problem of equivalence in translation (2010, pp.4-5).

1. Adaptation, the translator replace the element of culture of SL with the TL’s which

has the same characteristics and the element of culture is common in target reader.

This technique used if the cultural equivalence of SL cannot be found in TL.


As white as snow Seputih kapas

Lexically, snow means salju. However, salju never exists in Indonesia. Accordingly,

the translator search another thing with the same characteristic with snow, that is the

color; white. Kapas is considered has the same characteristic with snow.

2. Amplification is translating by explicit or paraphrase the implicit information in

SL. Foot note is a part of amplification.

3. Borrowing is the translator borrows the text of SL. It can be without adjustment

(pure borrowing), or with adjustment (naturalized borrowing).


Mixer Mixer (Pure borrowing)

Mixer Mikser (Naturalized borrowing)

Some Indonesian people spell Mikser for Mixer because of the phonetic inventory

of Indonesian is different with English.

4. Calque is a translation technique which the translator translates a phrase of SL liter-

ally.


Directorate General Direktoral Jendral

5. Compensation, the translator introduces the element of information or the influence

the SL’s style of text which cannot be applied in TL


A pair of scissors Sebuah gunting

In English, it is common to say a pair of scissors, a pair of trousers, etc. because the

things have two sides. However for Indonesian custom, scissors and trousers is con-

sidered as one thing, that is why it is claimed as sebuah.

6. Description, replacing a term in SL by the description of its form and function.


Panettone Kue tradisional Italia yang dimakan pada

saat Tahun Baru.

Indonesian does not know the concept of panettone, in consequence, it is necessary

to use description to explain the word.

7. Discursive creation is used to display unexpected or out of context equivalence.

This technique is used to attract attention of the reader. This technique is common

used in translating title of book or film.


The Godfather Sang Godfather

Godfather is considered more attractive than its lexical meaning in Indonesian; Ba-

pak baptis.

8. Established equivalence is used to translating term or expression which is common

in daily used. This technique is similar with literal translation.


Ambiguity Ambigu

9. Generalization, the translation is materialized using general or neutral term. This

technique used because TL does not have specific equivalence which similar with

SL’s.


Penthouse, mansion Tempat tinggal

Penthouse and mansion is generally translated into tempat tinggal because the con-

cept of Penthouse and mansion; a large stately house is uncommon in TL.

10. Linguistic amplification is adding the element of linguistics in TL. This technique

is common used in more consecutive translation or in dubbing.

11. Linguistic compression is a technique which is used in simultaneous translation or

in subtitling by fusing the element of linguistics in TL.

12. Literal translation is word by word translation without relating it with context.


Killing two birds with a stone Membunuh dua burung dengan satu batu.

13. Modulation is changing the perspective, focus or cognitive category in relation

with ST. The changing can be lexical or structural.


Nobody doesn’t like it Semua orang menyukainya

14. Particularization is the technique using more concrete term. It is the converse of

generalization.


Air transportation Pesawat

15. Reduction is omitting some text partially because the omitting is considered will

not diverge the meaning.


SBY, the president of the republic of In-

donesia.

SBY

The omitting of the president of the republic of Indonesia is considered will not

diverge the meaning because Indonesian people knows who SBY is.

16. Substitution refers to modification of the linguistic and paralinguistic (intonation

and sign) element. For example, put hand on chest is translated into Thank You in

Arabian.

17. Variation is modifying the element of linguistic or paralinguistic which influence

the variation of linguistic: textual, style, social and geographical dialect change.

This technique is common used in translating script.

18. Shift or transposition is modifying level or category of ST. Such as translating

word into phrase.


Adept Sangat terampil

19. Addition is common technique used in translation that is adding information which

is tidak ada in ST.

20. Deletion is similar with reduction which is signed by deleting the information com-

prehensively while deletion is signed by deleting partially.

a. Mildred L. Larson

Larson offers 5 strategies of known concept equivalence; nonliteral lexical

equivalent, descriptive phrases, related words as equivalent, generic specific words,

and secondary or figurative senses (Larson, 1984, pp.154-172) and 3 strategies of un-

known concept equivalence; modifying of generic words, modifying loan words, and

cultural substitutes (Beekman and Callow, 1974 cited in Larson 1984).

Known concept equivalence

1. Nonliteral lexical equivalent is used when the translator translates a number of

words or several words by a single word in the target language or vice versa (Lar-

son, 1984, p.154). It is used when the concept is found in the target language, but it

has different expression.


I wonder if there’s any point in going on. Aku ingin tahu apakah ada gunanya

melanjutkan.

Oh, children, children. Here you

must stop. And whatever happens, do not

let yourselves be seen. Farewell.

Oh, anak-anak. Di sini kalian harus

berhenti. Dan apa pun yang terjadi, jan-

gan biarkan diri kalian tampak. Sampai

jumpa.

The word “wonder” is translated as “ingin tahu” and “farewell” is translated by

“sampai jumpa”. Although, in its lexical meaning, “wonder” means as “bertanya”

and “farewell” is “perpisahan”. Due its function to keep the meaning, the writer

suggests that the translator chose those words to be the equivalent of the source

words.

2. Descriptive Phrases, is used when the translator give some description or infor-

mation about a word or phrase in the target language (Larson (1984, p.155)


But it’s time we we’re out of this. Tapi saat ini kita tidak punya waktu.

Father Christmast: and now, for your

presents. There is a new and better

shewing machine for you, Mrs. Beaver.

I will drop it in your house as I pass.

Mrs. Beaver: if you please, sir. It’s

locked up

Father Christmast: Nah sekarang, ha-

diah kalian. Ada mesin jahit baru yang

lebih bagus untukmu, bu Berang-be-

rang. Aku akan meninggalkannya di

rumahmu

Mrs. Beaver: Maaf, sir. Rumahku

terkunci.

In the first example, the word “this” is translated as “waktu” due to its de-

scription of the word “time”. The information is acquired by the previous word in one

sentence. The position of word “this” can be replaced as “time” since the main point

that was talking about is the time.

In second example, the word “it’s” is translated by “rumahku”. It gives the

description to the reader that something which is locked up is the house. The literal

translation of “it” is “ini” or “itu”, but it is not common in Indonesian to use that

word in referring something because it will not be understandable. In addition, the sit-

uation is clearly shown in the previous dialogue given which is talking about the

Beaver’s house. It has shown that a word is translated by descriptive phrase.

3. Related Word as Equivalent is finding the precise word to be used as the equiva-

lent of the lexical item in the source text. Sometimes, they use synonym, antonym,

or reciprocal word from its original lexical item (Larson, 1984:156).

Synonyms as equivalents


And may I ask, O Lucy Daughter of

Eve. How you have come into Narnia?

Dan bolehkah saya bertanya, O Lucy,

Putri Hawa. Bagaimana anda bisa

sampai di Narnia?

Hadn’t we all better go to bed?

There’s sure to be a row if we’re heard

talking here.

Bukankah lebih baik kita semua

tidur? Pasti akan ada yang menghukum

kita kalau kita terdengar masih

mengobrol begini.

It is found that the word “come” is translated by “sampai”. In its lexical mean-

ing, “come” means as “datang” and the word is synonym with “sampai”. It indicates

that the speaker has come to a specific place.

It is similar to the previous case, the word “talking” which means “berbicara”

also has the same meaning with “mengobrol”. It has shown that the synonym of origi-

nal lexical items is used in the translation.

Antonyms as equivalents


It’s all right. I’ve come back. Tidak apa-apa. Aku sudah

kembali

It was all different a moment

ago. Honestly it was. I promise.

Semuanya berbeda beberapa saat

yang lalu. Sumpah, aku tidak berbohong

The word “all right” can be translated as “baik-baik saja”. Therefore, the translator

seems to choose the negative form of lexical as the equivalent. The word “all right” is

translated by “tidak apa-apa”. Meanwhile, the second example shows that “promise”

translated by “tidak berbohong” in order to make it more exaggerated. It implies that

the speaker is eager to say that she is not lying and what she say is true. In addition,

the word “honestly” also contribute in choosing those lexical equivalent to replace the

meaning of “promise”.

4. Generic-specific words as Equivalents used when a word is translated by a more

generic or specific word in the target language or vice versa (Larson, 1984,

p.157). This strategy is used to generalize a word in target language or even make

it more specific.


Here is your brother and—there is no

need to talk to him about what is past.

Ini saudara kalian dan—tidak perlu

membicarakan apa yang sudah lewat

dengannya.

He is in Narnia at this moment. He’ll

settle the White Queen all right. It is he,

not you that will save Mr. Tumnus.

Dia ada di Narnia saat ini. Dia

akan melawan Penyihir Putih,

pastinya. Dialah, dan bukan kalian,

yang akan menyelamatkan Mr. Tumnus

The word “brother” is translated by “saudara”. It is the generalization of “kakak” or

“adik”. In English, there is a terminology of the proper name of member in nuclear family.

As an example, the word “daughter” is referring to a girl and “son” to a boy. Therefore, the

word “brother” is used for kakak or adik laki-laki and “sister” for kakak or adik perempuan.

In this case, a word in source language is translated by its generic word in target language.

In Indonesian, it is generalizes into a single word “dia”. In this case, the word “she”

and “he” are translated in the same word “dia”, without considering and differentiating the

gender of the speaker.

5. Secondary or figurative senses are used in the source text and translated using

lexical items primary senses as equivalents and vice versa (Larson, 1984, p.159).

Secondary senses as equivalents


I think he’s an old dear Kurasa dia manis sekali

And what do you think, my dear? Dan bagaimana menurutmu, sayangku?

I don’t think you’re a bad Faun at

all. I think you are a very good Faun.

Aku sama sekali tidak menganggapmu faun yang

jahat. Kurasa kau faun yang sangat baik.

In those examples, the word “think” is translated differently. The process of thinking itself,

involves brain to probably imagine, remember something, or finding solution of a problem.

Thus, the word “think” is translated differently based on the context of the dialogue convey

by the speaker. It can be occurred when the secondary senses of the word are affected by the

use of other word preceded or followed.

Figurative senses as equivalents are based on associative relation with the primary sense

(Beekman and Callow, 1974 cited in Larson, 1984). Some types of figurative sense are:

Metonymy is a figure of speech that uses a concept closely related to the thing actu-

ally meant. The substitution makes the analogy more vivid and meaningful. In other words,

we are replacing one word by another word or phrase that has a similar meaning.


The potatoes are on boiling and the kettle’s

singing and I daresay, Mr. Beaver, you’ll get

us some fish.

Kentang-kentang sudah direbus mendidih

dan ketel sudah bersiul, dan menurutku, Pak

berang-berang, lebih baik kau mencari ikan.

The word “singing” indicates that the kettle already making a sound. The lexical equivalent

“bersiul” is chosen by the translator to replace the meaning of singing. In fact, the kettle can-

not sing. The word “bersiul” is being used in a figurative way to refer to the sound of the ket-

tle when the water is boiling.

Idiom is the language peculiar which consist of at least two words that cannot be un-

derstood literally and has its own function as a unit semantically (Beekman and Callow, 1974

as cited in Larson, 1984).


We’ve fallen on our feet and no mistake.

This is going to be perfectly splendid.

Kita datang ke tempat yang tepat, tidak

salah lagi. Tinggal disini akan asyik sekali

What on earth are you talking about, Lucy? Apa maksudmu, Lucy?

A jolly good hoax, Lu. You have really taken us

in. I must admit. We half believed you.

Tipuan yang hebat, Lu. Kau sudah

menipu kami semua, harus kuakui. Kami

sempat percaya padamu tadi

Those examples above show that the meaning of an idiom is difficult to presume by

looking at its literal meaning. The writer found no idiom that is translated literally. Each word

on the idioms has its own meaning that should be conveyed in the translation. Therefore, it

will be necessary to translate the idioms with nonfigurative expressions if there is no good id-

iom in target language which may be used to communicate the meaning (Larson, 1984,

p.115).

Hyperbole is a figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect

(Beekman and Callow, 1974 as cited in Larson, 1984).


We were afraid it mightn’t even be

lying. We thought there might be

something wrong with Lucy.

Kami khawatir anak itu tidak berbohong. Kami

pikir mungkin ada yang salah dengan Lucy.

The word “afraid” means scared or frightened with something. In this dialogue, the

translator has translated the word “afraid” with lexical equivalent of “khawatir”. The meaning

of afraid itself point out that something frightened has occurred. Thus, the writer assumes that

by using the word “khawatir” in translation will make the concept clear. Therefore, there is

nothing frightened because they only talk about someone who is accused not telling the truth.

Unknown Lexical Item

1. Modifying a generic word is used when a generic word is to be used as the equivalent

lexical item by constructing an adequate equivalent. In other hand, some information

needs to be added in order to make clear the form and function (Larson, 1984:67).


This is no thaw. This is Spring. Ini bukan salju mencair. Ini musim semi

In its literal meaning, “thaw” is melt or become liquid or soft again. The translator

converts the meaning by using the description on something which has the same

meaning with melted. As a result, the word “thaw” translated by “salju mencair”.

2. Modifying loan word is used for the unknown data of lexical items. It is used when

the data is translated without changing the form of the lexical items in source lan-

guage (Larson, 1984, p.169). Loan word usually used to translate names of people,

place, band, food, cultural day, geographical areas, etc (Larson, 1984:169). This strat-

egy is applied by translator when there is no equivalent for those words.


She is a perfectly terrible person. She calls her-

self the Queen of Narnia though she has no right

to be queen at all, and all the Fauns and Dryads

and Naiads and Dwarfs and Animals--at least all

the good ones—simply hate her.

Dia orang yang sangat jahat. Dia menyebut

dirinya sebagai Ratu Narnia meskipun dia sama

sekali tidak berhak jadi ratu, dan para faun,

para dryad, dan para naiad, serta para dwarf

dan bintang—paling tidak yang baik—mem-

bencinya.

Narnia indicates the name of place. While fauns, dryads, naiads, and dwarfs are the names of

sort half-man animal which are mentioned in the story. They are some of the characters plays

in the novel. Name of people and place can be translated by using loan word (Larson,

1984:169).

Cultural Substitutes is used to replace a source cultural word by another cultural substitute

of the target language (Larson, 1984:171).


There’s a wireless and lots of book. Ada radio dan banyak buku

The word “radio” is presented as the equivalent from the word “a wireless”. In the world to-

day, “a wireless” can be referring to “mobile phone”. Hence, considering the time of the

novel published, the word “radio” can be used to present the equivalents of “a wireless”.

Hence, the word “a wireless” translated by “radio” may replace the cultural word in source

language with cultural substitute in target language (Larson, 1984:171).

CONCLUSION

Equivalence is a crucial problem in translation which is necessary to be observed. The

difficulties finding exact equivalence which truly reflect the meaning of source text is caused

by difference culture both SL and TL. Experts have defined equivalence in translation from

different perspectives. They offer strategies which can be used by translators to solve the

problem of equivalence in translating.

REFERENCE

Baker, M. 1992. A Coursebook on Translation. London: Routledge.

Catford,J.C.1996. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. London: Oxford University press.

House, J.1977. A Model for Translation Quality Assesment. Tubingen: Gunter Narr.

Jakobson, R.1959. Linguistics Aspects of Translation. NewYork: Harvard University Press.

Nida, E.A.1964. Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: E.J.Brill.

Baker, Mona. 2006. In Other Words. A Coursebook on Translation. London: Routledge Group.

Larson, Mildred L. 1998. Meaning based Translation: A Guide to Cross-Language Equiva-lence (Second edition). USA:University Press of America Inc.

Equivalence in Translation

Documents

experts of translation

problem of equivalence

translation of english

translation indah

interlinguala translation

essence of translation

kinds of translation

sourceoriented translation