Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Journal

Translation Techniques and Grammatical Equivalence in Indonesian English Translation of “Central Java Visitor Guide”

English Education Journal · Vol. 8 No. 2 (2018) · pp. 254–264

DOI
10.15294/eej.v8i3.22622
ISSN
2087-0108, 2502-4566
Published
2018-04-02
Publisher
Universitas Negeri Semarang
Language
eng

Abstract

“Central Java Visitor Guide” is a media to promote tourism for International tourists. This study was intended to reveal the translation techniques used by the translator in translating the sentences and to see the resulted grammatical equivalence between the source text (ST) and target text (TT). This study was done qualitatively. The findings of the research reveal that nine of 18 translation techniques proposed by Molina & Albir (2002) are chosen by the translator. They are: literal, borrowing, modulation, reduction, amplification, transposition, particularization, generalization, and description. Literal translation (50.98 %) and borrowing (17.24 %) are the most dominant technique used. On the other hand, generalization and description are the lowest ones (0.73 %). It is also found out that the translator’s choice of translation techniques has resulted in 223 used of voice equivalent (45.60 %), 203 used of tense equivalent (41.51 %), and 63 used of number equivalent (12.88 %). There is no certain techniques influence the equivalence on tense and number category. However, non-equivalent on the category of voice is caused by the use of modulation and transposition techniques. Besides that, this study also analyses the common problems of non-equivalence. They are: culture specific term (75.67 %), TL lacks specific term (12.16 %), TL lacks superordinate (8.10 %), and the use of loan words in the ST (4.05 %). Therefore, it can be concluded that the high rate of grammatical equivalence shows the translator’s success in translating the text.

Collaboration network of the authors

40 authors · 163 co-authorship links · showing the 40 most connected

Hover or tap a name to highlight its co-authors. Double-click to open the author's page.

  • Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember
  • Institut Agama Islam Negeri Kendari
  • Universitas Halu Oleo
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Different organisations
  • Same organisation
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Thicker line = more joint articles · bigger circle = more articles
Show as table
Co-authorOrganisationJoint articles
Dwi RukminiAffiliation unknown7
Januarius MujiyantoAffiliation unknown7
Suwandi SuwandiAffiliation unknown5
Abdurrachman FaridiAffiliation unknown5
Warsono WarsonoAffiliation unknown5
Hendi PratamaAffiliation unknown5
Djoko SutopoAffiliation unknown5
SRI WAHYUNIAffiliation unknown4
Puji AstutiAffiliation unknown4
Mursid SalehAffiliation unknown4
Rahayu Puji HaryantiAffiliation unknown3
Ahmad SofwanAffiliation unknown2
Sri Wuli FitriatiAffiliation unknown2
Bambang PurwantoAffiliation unknown2
Zulfa SakhiyyaAffiliation unknown2
Sri Wuli FitriatiAffiliation unknown2
Fahrur RoziInstitut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember2
Dwi Anggani Linggar BharatiAffiliation unknown2
Dwi Anggani Linggar BharatiAffiliation unknown2
Moh. Akhdan Aufarizal IrhamiAffiliation unknown1
Muhammad Zaid MuttaqinAffiliation unknown1
Nyayu Yayu SuryaniAffiliation unknown1
Nesia OktaniaAffiliation unknown1
Novi Rahmania AquarizaAffiliation unknown1
Alief Noor FaridaAffiliation unknown1
Pasca KalisaAffiliation unknown1
Girindra Putri Dewi SaraswatiAffiliation unknown1
Wa Ode Zulhidjah AwalyahInstitut Agama Islam Negeri Kendari1
Muhamad Dedi Manfaluthi ManfaluthiAffiliation unknown1
Putri AnggraeniAffiliation unknown1
Yuliana YulianaUniversitas Halu Oleo1
Annisa Nur AtikahAffiliation unknown1
Eka FatmawatiAffiliation unknown1
Frimadhona SyafriAffiliation unknown1
wilis nurlelaAffiliation unknown1
Andini Lusiana SariAffiliation unknown1
SetiowatiAffiliation unknown1

Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.

Metadata source: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej/oai, first harvested 5 Nov 2026, last seen 5 Nov 2026.
Original metadata (oai_dc)
<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en-US">Translation Techniques and Grammatical Equivalence in Indonesian English Translation of “Central Java Visitor Guide”</dc:title>
	<dc:creator>afifah, Iif nur</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator>Hartono, Rudi</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator>Yuliasri, Issy</dc:creator>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en-US">“Central Java Visitor Guide” is a media to promote tourism for International tourists. This study was intended to reveal the translation techniques used by the translator in translating the sentences and to see the resulted grammatical equivalence between the source text (ST) and target text (TT). This study was done qualitatively. The findings of the research reveal that nine of 18 translation techniques proposed by Molina &amp;amp; Albir (2002) are chosen by the translator. They are : literal, borrowing, modulation, reduction, amplification, transposition, particularization, generalization, and description. Literal translation&amp;nbsp; (50.98 %) and borrowing (17.24 %) are the most dominant technique used. On the other hand, generalization and description are the lowest ones (0.73 %). It is also found out that the translator’s choice of translation techniques has resulted in 223 used of voice equivalent (45.60 %), 203 used of tense equivalent (41.51 %), and 63 used of number equivalent (12.88 %). There is no certain techniques influence the equivalence on tense and number category. However, non-equivalent on the category of voice is caused by the use of modulation and transposition techniques. Besides that, this study &amp;nbsp;also analyses the common problems of non-equivalence. They are : culture specific term (75.67 %), TL lacks specific term (12.16 %), TL lacks superordinate (8.10 %), and the use of loan words in the ST (4.05 %). Therefore, it can be concluded that the high rate of grammatical equivalence shows the translator’s success in translating the text.</dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en-US">Universitas Negeri Semarang</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2018-04-02</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:type xml:lang="en-US">Peer-reviewed Article</dc:type>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/eej/article/view/22622</dc:identifier>
	<dc:identifier>10.15294/eej.v8i3.22622</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en-US">English Education Journal; Vol 8 No 2 (2018): June 2018; 254-264</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2087-0108</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2502-4566</dc:source>
	<dc:source>10.15294/eej.v8i3</dc:source>
	<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/eej/article/view/22622/10711</dc:relation>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en-US">Copyright (c) 2018 English Education Journal</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>