Hello!

Probems of Equivalence
Mustika Yanti (0304192130)
Rahma Yanti Hasibuan (0304192104)
Rizmeyni Azhima Putri (0304192116)

Hi!
Translation is a process of transference operating among source language and target language, which
also means as interpretation of the verbal symbol in one language via the symbol of other languages.
Translation must be reliable and valid. Hence, the translation needs to be equivalent. According to
Bell, equivalence is the condition where text in different languages can be equivalent in different
degrees (fully or partially), in respect of different level of context, semantics, grammar, lexis, etc., and
at different ranks (word for word, phrase for phrase, sentence for sentence).
Catford looks at equivalence as a formal or textual property
of the process of translation. In other words, equivalence is
related to the ability of the translator to maintain at least
some of the same features of subtance indicated in the
original text. The domain of equivalent covers linguistic
units such as morphemes, words, phrases, clauses, idioms,
and proverbs. So, finding equivalent is the most
problematic stage of translation.
Types of equivalence
According to Nida (Toward a Science of Translating, 1964, p. 159), Nida classifies equivalent translation into two, as
follows:

a. Formal equivalence
Formal equivalence focuses on the message, both in form and content. The message in the target language should match as
closely as possible with the different elements in the source language. This means, the message in the source culture to
determine standards of accuracy and correctness.
Example:
SL: One of them home empty handed.
TL: Salah satu dari mereka kembali dengan tangan hampa.

b. Dynamic equivalence
A translation of dynamic equivalence aims at complete naturalness of expression and tries to relate the receptor to modes of
behaviour relevant within the context of his own culture.
Example:
SL: It’s an only fact of life.
TL: Beginilah kehidupan.
 Problems of equivalence

Hello!
1. In some instances, there are no equivalent terms at word level (target level has no direct equivalence
for a word in source language).
Example:
SL: Nobody.
TL: Tak seorangpun.

2. No-equivalence due to non-compliance with the target languages’ linguistics rules.

Example:
SL: Rain-rotted shingles dropped over the eaves of the veranda.
TL: Genting yang dikeroposi oleh hujan menjuntai dari tepian serambi.
3. No-equivalence due to not meet the cultural context of the target language.
Example:
SL: She married a taciturn man.
TL: Dia menikahi lelaki pendiam.

4. No-equivalence due to the irrelevance of referential meaning.

Example:
SL: Jen turned out the light.
TL: Jen menyalakan lampu.
Thank you