Name: Eka Fitriana NPM: 1911040324 Class: 5E Translation Practice For Academic Context

Name : EKA FITRIANA
NPM : 1911040324
Class : 5E
Translation practice for academic context
1. Definition ambiguity in translation according to 3 experts!

 Ambiguity arises when a single word is associated in the language system with
more than one meaning. (Chierchia and Ginet (1992), An Analysis Of
Ambiguity In English Text Translations Into Bahasa Indonesia Made By
Commercial Translators, page9).
 Ambiguity as the condition where by any linguistic form has two one more
interpretation. (Kriedler 1998) Journal An Analysis Of Ambiguity In English
Text Translations Into Bahasa Indonesia Made By Commercial Translators,
page 9).
 A word, phrase, sentence or other communication is ambiguous if it has more
than one meaning. (Bach 1994), Journal An Analysis Of Ambiguity In
English Text Translations Into Bahasa Indonesia Made By Commercial
Translators, page 9).
2. What are the type so ambiguity in translation according to experts!
 Bach (1994) states that there are two types of ambiguity such as lexical and
structural ambiguities. Lexical ambiguity is by far the more common.
 Katz (1971: 248) divides ambiguity into four types. They are phonetic
ambiguity, structural ambiguity, lexical ambiguity and referential ambiguity.
(An Analysis Of Ambiguity In English Text Translations Into Bahasa
Indonesia Made By Commercial Translators, page10)
Phonetic Ambiguity
Phonetic ambiguity occurs in the sound production. In this case the listener shear
the same sound of one expression but it has different meaning or interpretation of
the listener. Katz states that since the acoustic unit of speech is the breath group
made up of different words become homonymous and thus potentially ambiguous.
For example the expression „he can can the can‟.The words „can‟ have the same
sound but different meaning. (Katz, Journal An Analysis Of Ambiguity In
Translators, page 10&11)
Structural Ambiguity
A sentence may be ambiguous because of the clause types that are involved.
Structural ambiguity occurs when a phrase or sentence has more than one
underlying structure. The ambiguity stems from the prepositional phrase on the
table which can function as an adverb and adjective. Example: He is eating the
fish on the table. (Katz, Journal An Analysis Of Ambiguity In English Text
Translations Into Bahasa Indonesia Made By Commercial Translators, page11)
Lexical Ambiguity
Sometimes one meaning of a word is derived roman other. For example, the
cognitye sense of „see‟ seems derived from its visual sense. The sense of„weight‟
in „He weighed the package‟ is derived from its sense in „The pack age weighed
two pounds‟. Similarly, the transitive sense of „burn‟,„fly‟ and „walk‟ are derived
from their intransitive senses. (Katz, Journal An Analysis Of Ambiguity In
Translators, page11).
Referential Ambiguity
If it is unclear what a referring expression is referring to, then the expression is
referentially ambiguous. For example, a pronoun is a referring
expressionsuchas„it‟,„he‟,„they‟,etc.Referentialambiguityoccurswhenaspeaker has
one referent mind for a definite expression. (Katz, Journal An Analysis Of
Ambiguity In English Text Translations Into Bahasa Indonesia Made By
Commercial Translators, page12)
3. Untranslatability in translation according to3 experts.
Untranslatability or translation fails occurs when it is impossible to build
functionally relevant features of the situation into the contextual meaning of the
target language text. (Calford [2], Journal Untranslatability Foun din
J.K.Rowling's English Novel Harry Potter and The Sorcerer's Stone and Its
Indonesian Version, page 86).
Untranslation Translating is the process of transferring messages from SL into SL.
In this process, there are often untranslations in linguistics which caused by
differences in the Source language (SL) and Target Language (TL),and cultural
untranslatability is caused by the absence of situation-relevant features. (Catford,
1978). The untranslation in this article refers to the cultural untranslation where
the word or phrase in SL does not have the closest natural equivalent to BS. This
happens because the concept of culture in the source language does not exist in the
discussion of Goals. In addition, Nababan (2008) also mentions that sometimes
the equivalent that we usually understand if we look more deeply into the area
semantics, there will be different concepts as well, for example, breakfast which
in Indonesian is accepted with its equivalent, namely breakfast. Will but if we
look more deeply into its meaning (semantic features) then there are differences
the concept of breakfast in Western society with the concept of breakfast that we
have.
Untranslatability are caused by eleven reasons: culture specific concept, the
source-language concept is not lexicalized in the target language, the source-
language word semantically complex , the source and target languages make
different distinctions in meaning , target language lack of super ordinate, target
language lacks a specific term, differences in physical or interpersonal
perspective, differences in expressive meaning, differences in form, differences in
frequency and purpose of using specific forms, and the use of loan word sin the
source text. (Baker [3],Journal Untranslatability Found in J.K.Rowling's
English Novel Harry Potter and The Sorcerer's Stone and Its
IndonesianVersion,page87).
4. Catford distinguishes two types of untranslatability, which he called as linguistic and
cultural untranslatability [2].
Linguistic Untranslatability
It occurs when there is no lexical or syntactical substitute in the target text for a
source text item. Linguistic untranslatability happened because the failure to find a
target text equivalent is due entirely to differences between the source text and the
TT. In Indonesian, the linguistic untranslatability is due to grammatical matter. I
applies theory of Grammatical Categories by Palmer [5] to make boundaries with
cultural untranslatability. It deals with gender, number, person, tense, mood, voice
and case.
For example, the particle “the” in Indonesia mostly omitted since it was not
recognized in Indonesian and it didn‟t affect the translation. (Palmer [5], Journal
Untranslatability Found in J.K. Rowling's English Novel Harry Potter and The
Sorcerer's Stone and Its Indonesian Version,page87).
Cultural Untranslatability
It occurs due to the absence in the target text culture of a relevant situational
feature for the source text. This type of untranslatability deals with culture
differences between English and Indonesian. As the indicator, I applies translation
and culture theory by New mark [6]. The differences including ecology, material
culture, social culture, customs and habits.
For example the term of „phoenix‟ or often called as the firebird. In Indonesia,
there is no creature which has similar ability and similar appearance with phoenix,
even though some literature commonly translate it into „burung api‟ considering to
its ability. (Netmark [6], Journal Untranslatability Found in J.K. Rowling's
English Novel Harry Potter and The Sorcerer's Stone and Its Indonesian
Version, page 86&87).
An Analysis Of Ambiguity In English Text Translations Into Bahasa Indonesia
Made By Commercial Translators
Selvyane.I.Lumban Batu, Erika Sinambela, Caroline Pakpahan
erika_sinambela@yahoo.com
Abstract
This study is focused on the ambiguity in translators’ translations. The objectives are to investigate
the types of ambiguity used in the translators’ translations. Descriptive study is used in writing this the
study. Descriptive study is intended to describe, explore and clarify the reality and social phenomena. In this
the study, the data of this study was collected by translation test. The translators were asked to translate
four English texts, entitle Historical Introduction, A Framework for the Analysis and Evaluation of Theories of
Translation, Biography of Shakespeare, and Catwoman. The data are three types of Ambiguity meaning
namely structural ambiguity, lexical ambiguity and referential ambiguity. After analyzing the data, the writer
found that there are only two ambiguities happen namely lexical ambiguity and referential ambiguity. The
writer also concluded that lexical ambiguity is the most dominant type found in commercial translators’
translations.
Key words: Ambiguity meaning, structural ambiguity, lexical ambiguity, referential ambiguity
1. Introduction
A problem comes when we cannot understand the content of a book that is written in
English. In Indonesia, there are few people understand the text written in English well and also
there are few books that have been translated in Indonesia because of the problem, Indonesia is still
lack of information. Due to the fact that the books are not only written in our own language, it
requires a process of translation.
Nida and Taber (1982:12) say that translating consists in reproducing the closest natural
equivalence of a source language message into the receptor language. Equivalence is not only
limited to the language equivalent, such as: word with word, sentence with sentence, but also
included the meaning equivalent. The meaning equivalent can be in grammatical meaning.
However, the meaning in a source language must be same in the target language. In addition, the
accuracy must be concerned in determining the equivalence used in target language.
Accuracy in term of translation process is not like mathematical accuracy where two plus
two equals four. This is almost impossible in translation. It refers to how much information in a
source language transferred to a target language where the information in target language should be
picked up as closely as possible the information or massage in the source language.
Newmark (1981:170) says that accuracy in communicative translation basically lexical.

The translator can treat the grammar flexibly and adroitly within limit, recasting unit to strengthen
the logic of text but the lexis must be accurate.
In understanding the meaning, it is very important to know the role of meaning because it
has a great contribution to delivery some information for the readers. But, in fact most of the
readers always faced some problems when they try to get some meaning from English Text. They
still find difficult in understanding the meaning in the sentence because some ambiguities meaning
often occur in the text. As the result, they are not interested in reading English Text and bored.
Beside that, the translators in learning language always translate the Text by using their perception
without care ambiguity. As consequent, their translation does not give good result.
Based on the explanation above, this study has the implication for teaching because by
analyzing ambiguity, translators can make good translation. Therefore, it is very interesting to discuss
ambiguity for the translators‟ translation.
There are some translators who work around campus USU, to help students in finishing their
assignments. But the quality of translation is often ignored by the students. The main objective of this
study is to find out the ambiguity in English translation into Indonesian made by commercial
translators.
2. Translation
Nida and Taber (1982:12) in their book „The theory and Practice of Translation’, say that
translating consist in reproducing the closest natural equivalence of a source language message into
the receptor language, firstly in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style. According to Nida
and Taber, translators should use the closest natural equivalent either in the meaning or the style of the
receptor language. In other words, the result of translation should not sound as translation. Translation
is concerned with the comparison of two languages. It is important to contrast the languages so that
the differences can be understood. When the differences are discovered, it is easier for the translator to
find the equivalent in the target language. The differences should be used as an aid
to understanding the problem of translation. There are:
1. The translator cannot find the shared information presented in both languages.
2. The translator is not familiar with types of a text, variety of cultural expressions and scientific
explanation.
Actually there is no direct step in the procedures of translation. Larson (1984:476) clearly
explains it that in actual practice of translation, the translator moves back and forth from the source
text in order to find the receptor text. Some times he will be analyzing the source text to find the
meaning, then restructuring this meaning in the receptor language, and moving back once again to
look at the source text or the semantic analysis he has done.
A similar definition of translation is mentioned by Catford (1965: 20) in his book A Linguistic
Theory of Translation, who says that translation may be defined as the replacement of textual material
in one language (SL) by equivalent textual material in another language (TL).
Widyamartaya (1989:14) in his book Seni Menerjemahkan says that translation is a process,
which consists of activities bunch. In his book, he also gives how to translate the text, the sentence,
and the letter.
Translation must be supported by the accuracy of translation. The accuracy refers to how
much information in source language transferred to a target language, where the information in target
language should be the some with the information or message in the source language. According to
Newmark (1981: 178) in his book Approaches To Translation, the accuracy in communicative
translation basically
lexical. The translator can treat the grammar flexibly and adroitly within to strengthen the logic of the
text, but the lexis must be accurate.
Definitions of Translation
Translation in general may be regarded as an art and a skill. It as an art implies that this
knowledge cannot be taught freely. We have to train our mind by exercising and repeating certain
procedures acceptable. The ability can be improved thought the constant practice. On the other hand
translation as a skill or science suggest that anyone could be a translator provided that he or she is
willing to learn some approaches or theories which derived primarily from linguistics.
There are some definitions of translation given by some linguists, and they are:
1. Brislin (1976: 1) defines “Translation is the general term referring to the transfer of thought
and ideas from one language (source) to another (target), whether the language are in
written or oral form, whether the languages have established orthographies or do not have
such standardization, or whether one or both languages are based on sign, as with sign
languages of the deaf”.
2. Nida and Taber (1982: 2) propose that translating consists of reproducing in the receptor
language the closets natural equivalent of the source language message, first in terms of
meaning and secondly in term of style. According to Nida and Taber, translators should use
the closest natural equivalent either in the meaning or the style of the receptor language. In
other words, the results of translation should not sound as translation but without changing
the meaning of the source language.
3. Catford (1956: 20) state, “….the replacement of textual material in one language (SL) by
equivalent textual material in another language ( TL)”.
Translation detail defines as transferring the meaning of the source language into the
receptor language. It is meaning which is being transferred and must be held constant. Only the form
changes. That’ why ‘Don’t mention it’ (as an answer of than you) not become ‘Jangan menyebutnya’
or’ Jangan sebutkan itu’, but it should become ‘Terimakasih kembali’ or ‘sama-sama’. That’s the
meaning “Don’t mention it’ here.
Types of Translation
Generally, Translation divided consists of two types: literal translation and non-literal
translation/free translation. Larson (19984: 15) says that translation is classified into two main types,
namely form-based and meaning-based translation. Form-based translation attempts to follow the
form of the Source Language and is known as literal translation, while meaning-based translation
makes every effort to communicate the meaning of the Source Language text in the natural forms of
the receptor language. Such translation is called idiomatic translation.
An interlinear translation is a completely literal translation. For some purpose, it is desirable

to reproduce the linguistic feature of the source text, as in a linguistic study of that language.
Although these literal translations may be very useful for purpose related to study of the Source
interested in the meaning of the Source Language text. Larson (1984: 15) says that literal translation
sounds like nonsense and little communication value. It can be understood if the general grammatical
form of the two languages is similar.
Larson (1984: 16) says that except for interlinear translation, a truly literal translation is
uncommon. Most translators who tend to translate literally actually make a partially modified literal
translation. The translators modify the order and grammar to use an acceptable sentence structure in
the receptor language. However, the lexical items are translated literally and still the results do not
sound natural.
Larson (1984: 16) says that idiomatic translations use the natural form of the receptor
language both in the grammatical construction and in the choice of lexical items. A truly idiomatic
translation does not sound like a translation. It sounds like it was written originally in the receptor
language. Therefore, a good translator will try to translate idiomatically. This is his/her goal. For
example, „Be my guest’, the precise translation is ‘Silakan’. The native speakers who hear or read
‘silakan’. ‘silakan’, the form if more different form literal translation (priority in form) “Jadilah tamu
saya”.
Larson (1984: 17) says that in practice, it is hard to consistently translate idiomatically or
literally. These translations are often a mixture of literal and idiomatic forms of language. Translation
then falls on a continuum from very literal to literal, to modified literal, to near idiomatic, to
idiomatic, and may fall, even more on the unduly free as displayed below:
Modified Inconsiste Near Undul
Very Literal Idiomati
Literal nt Mixture Idiomati c y Free
Litera
c
l
Unduly free translations are considered unacceptable translations for most purposes.
Translations are called unduly free according to the following characteristic:
1). If they add extraneous information not in the source
text. 2). If they change the meaning of Source
Language, and.
3). If they distort the facts of the historical and cultural setting of the source language text.
Larson (1984: 17) says that sometimes unduly free translations are made for the purpose of humor to
bring about a special response from the receptor language speakers. However, they are unacceptable
as normal translation. For example:
English text:
“I was glad when Stepahnus, Fortunatus and Achaicus arrived, because they supplied what was
lacking from you. For they refreshed my spirit and yours also. Such men deserve recognition”.
Unduly free translation in English:

“It sure is good to see Steve, Lucky and „Bid Bam‟. They sorta make up your not being here. They‟re
a big boost to both me and you all. Let‟s give them a big hand”.
Unduly free translation in Bahasa Indonesia:
“Gua gembira deh si Steve, si Untung, dan si Akaikus datang sebagai pengganti kangen gua pada lu.
Mereka telah memberi semangat ame gua dan kalian semua. Mereka pantes dapat tepuk tangan yang
meriah”.
Catford (1965: 21) makes categories of translation in terms of extent, levels, and ranks of
translation. Based on the extent, he classifies translation into a full translation and a partial translation,
on the levels of translation there are total and restricted translation and on the ranks there are rank
bound and unbounded translation.
In a full translation, the entire text is submitted to the translation process, that is, every part of
the source language text is replaced by text material. By text Catford (1965: 21) means any stretch of
language, spoken or written, which is under discussion and according to circumstances a text, may be
a whole library of books, a singe volume, a chapter, a paragraph, a sentence, a clause, etc. In a partial
translation, some parts of the Source Language text are left untranslated. They are simply transferred
to the Target text. In a literary translation, it is uncommon for some Source Language lexical items to
be treated in this way.
A total translation means replacement of Source Language grammar and lexis by equivalent
Target Language grammar and lexis with consequential replacement of Source Language
phonology/graphology by non equivalent Target Language Phonology/graphology, while a restricted
translation means replacement of Source Language textual material by equivalent Target Language
textual material at only the phonological or at the graphological level, or at only one of the two levels
of grammar and lexis.
Rank-bound translation is translation is translation in which the selection of TL equivalent is

deliberately confined to one rank or a few ranks in the hierarchy of grammatical units, usually at word
or morpheme rank, that is, setting up word-to-word or morpheme-to-morpheme equivalence. In
contrast with this, normal translation in which the equivalence shifts freely up and down the rank
scale is called unbounded translation. Sometimes it tends to be at the higher ranks, sometimes
between larger units than the sentences.
Brislin (1976:3-4) says that based on the translator‟s method, there are bounded and
unbounded translations. Bounded translation is translation in which translator translates in one rank
usually in an interlinear way without changing the translator is free to move from one form to another.
It is done since it is only information needed in the translation and there is no importance of the form.
Based on practice translation, (Roman Jakobson in Susan Bassnett) divided into three types:
1. Intralingual translation (rewording) is an interpretation of verbal signs by means of other

signs in the same language. For example: “Dia sebatang kara” can be translated like “Dia
hidup sendirian”. In other words, the sentence in the source language is translated into the
same language as the target language. In the intralingual translation, vast knowledge of
the local or
native people should be possessed. There is no guarantee that the native speakers of a
language possess the knowledge about their own people.
2. Interlingual translation is an interpretation of verb sign by means of some other language.
There are two different language involved. For instance, the sentence “I am hungry” in
English as the source language can be translated into Indonesia as “Saya lapar”. Interlingual
translation is the most difficult type of translation because it involves two different
languages. The translator should possess the same amount of knowledge about the source
language and the target language.
3. Intersemiotic translation (transmutation) is an interpretation of verbal signs by means of
signs of non-verbal sign system. For example, when a traffic light is on, the color is translated
into a message for car drivers to stop their cars. The message is naturally expressed in a
sentence like you cannot go on. Another example is when a policeman waves his hand to the
right, it means that he slows the direction to the drivers saying, “this way, please!”. In the
intersemiotic translation, symbols and signs can be misinterpreted. Symbol and signs are not
universal. Colors, for instance, mean different things in different countries. In Russia, red
means power while in Chine it is holiness.
Each type of translation will pose a problem. Thus when a translator comes across a particular
sign or symbol, the meaning must be transferred. It is impossible to translate it without understanding
the cultural notion of the word. Sentences may also contain symbols.
Translation is concerned with the comparison two languages. It is important to contrast the
languages so that the differences can be understood. When the differences are discovered, it is easier
for the translator to find the equivalent in target language. The differences should be used as an aid to
understanding the problem of translation. The problems that a translator faces are:
1. The translator cannot find the shared information presented in both languages.
2. The translator is not familiar with types of a text, variety of cultural expressions and
scientific explanation.
Translation and Culture
Corder (1973:68) describes culture as sets of beliefs and behavior common to the members of
a society. They share to a large extent of the way they see the world around them, interpret events, and
consider what is important to them. They agree about the right and wrong ways of getting things done,
of dressing, eating, marrying, worshipping, and educating their young people, and so on. All of these
are their culture. Accordingly, culture includes beliefs, norms, values, assumptions, expectations, and
plans of action.
To develop the culture, the members of society use language as a communication tool, and
they possess a distinctive way of communicating through language. Nababan (1999:50) mentions the
language, as a communication system which is part of culture and it is always involved in the whole
aspects of culture. So, ir is impossible to develop a society‟s culture without language.
A language, however, has its meanings only in the culture, as Newmark (1981:183) states that
a language is partly the repository and reflection of a culture. Thus, different languages may contain
the different cultures or different ways of thinking.
Relating to translation, the connection between language and culture often becomes problems.
Nababan (1984:51) gives an example of this case that is the use of word village. The word village in
English is not the some village in Bahasa Indonesia since village and desa have different concept.
Village refers to the place smaller than a town where there are houses and shops, and usually a Church
or school, while desa commonly refers to the place far away out of town with wide farm and an
undeveloped place as opposed to town. Therefore, the term Jakarta as a big village used by a foreign
writer will lose its meaning if it is translated into desa yang besar. In this matter, a translator should
treat the source language differently, apart from the target language since the away of thinking of the
original writer is very likely to differ from the situation faced by people in the target language.
Process of Translation
There are seven process of translation, and they are:
1. Tuning. By this we mean getting the feel of the text to be translated. Depending on their field of
work, translators need to be able to produce the language of a poet or novelist, lawyer, or
economist, research physicist or factory manager, advertising, copywriter or biblical prophet.
Each ‘register’, as it is often called, demands a different mental approach, a different choice of
words or turn of phrase. If the text is difficult or the type which is not so familiar to the
translator, he may want to read some background literature or consult the author (if available)
or some other adviser.
2. Analysis. Once the translator has attuned his mind to the framework of the text to be translated,
he will take each sentence in turn and spilt it up into translatable units-words or phrases. He will
also establish the syntactic relations between the various elements of the sentence. At some
point in this phase (or the understanding or terminology phase), it may be necessary to establish
relations between elements in large positions of the text, in the interest of consistency.
3. Understanding. After having split up the sentence to be translated into its elements, the
translator will generally put it together again in a form which he can understand or respond to
emotionally. The extent to which he can do this will depend on his basic knowledge on the
subject matter. There has been a great deal of discussion about the extent to which a translator
should be able to understand the texts he translates-about how much attention he should pay
to the ‘content’ as opposed to ‘form’; it seems obvious that due attention to both form and
content is essential.
4. Terminology. The next step is to consider the key words and phrases in the sentence to make
sure that apart understanding them and feeling what they imply, one has a translation for them
which is in line with standardized usage and is neither misleading, ridiculous nor offensive for
the target-language reader. Both in this phase and in preceding (Understanding) phase,
discussion with the author or some other adviser is often advisable as the best way to help the
translator solve some of his problems.
5. Restructuring. When all the brick needed for the edifice of the target language text have been
gathered or made, the translator will fit them together in a form which is in accordance with
good usage in the target language. This is the phase where ‘form’, as opposed to ‘content’,
comes into its own.
6. Checking. The translator will doubtless check his draft translation for typing errors and passage
where a second perusal suggests a more elegant, or more correct, translation. In addition, it is
quite common
for someone other than the translator to read through the finished translation and make or suggest
changes. In the case of specialized texts, this is often the source language author or someone else
with a better command of the subject matter than the translator. In any case, it is important that
the translator should be consulted at this stage. It still happens too often that the corrector, while
improving the content of the target-language text, introduces blemishes in the form which are then
published under the translator‟s name.
7. Discussion. For this reason, good way to end the translation process is often with a discussion
between the translator and expert on the subject matter., it is generally inadvisable to make a
committee meeting with more than two participants-out of this: too many cooks spoil the broth.
On the other hand, it is sometimes necessary to point out to translator that they should not
work in isolation, and to help them in acquiring the social skills needed for discussions.
Principles of Translation
It is indispensable to value some guidelines on how to evaluate the works on translation. Some
general principles in the following are relevant to all translation. The principles below are:
1. The translation should not reflect accurately the meaning of the original text. Nothing should be
arbitrarily added or removed, though sometimes part of the meaning can be transposed. The
following questions may be very helpful:
a. Is the meaning of the original text clear? If not, where does the uncertainly lie?
b. Are any words loaded, that is, are there any underlying implications?
c. Is the dictionary meaning of a particular word the most suitable one?
d. Does anything in the translation sound unnatural or forced?
2. The ordering of the words and ideas in the translations should match the original as closely as
possible. This is particularly important in translating legal document, guarantees, contracts, etc.
However, differences in the target language structure often require changes in the form and
order of words. When in doubt, underline in the original text the words on which the main stress
falls.
3. Language often different greatly in their levels of formality in a given context, for example in the
business letter. To resolve these differences, the translator must distinguish between formal and
fixed expression, and personal expression in which the writer or speaker sets the tone, it is also
necessary to consider:
a. Would any expression in the original sound too formal/informal, cold/warm, personal if it
translator literally?
b. What is the intention of the speaker or write? To persuade, to apologize, or to criticize?
4. One of the most frequent criticisms of translation is that it does not sound natural’. This is
because the translator’s thought and choice of words are too strongly molded by the original
text. A good way to avoid the influence of the source language is to set the text aside and
translate a few sentences aloud from memory. This will suggest natural patterns of thought in
the first language which may not come to mind when the eye is fixed on the Source Language
text.
5. It will be better if the translator does not change the style of the original. But if it is needed, for
example because the text is full of repetitions or mistakes in writing, the translator may change
it.
The principles mentioned above can be very useful guideline for translators to help them
make some choices. The guidelines can be formulated in such a way that basically the requirements of
translation works have to be making sense, conveying the requirements of translation work shave to
be making sense, conveying the message of original texts without omission or addition, having a
natural and easy form of the expression, and producing a similar response to the readers.
Ambiguity
Ambiguity is commonly occurred in written language. It because written language doesn‟t

have suprasegmental to give the supporting complement such as intonation, stress, etc. Written
language is simply explained by the elements, which construct the sentences and the relationship of
each. Chierchia and Ginet (1992) define that ambiguity arises when a single word is associated in the
language system with more than one meaning. Kriedler (1998) defines ambiguity as the condition
where by any linguistic form has two one more interpretation. It means that the reader cannot clarify
the ambiguity directly to the writer because there are two meanings or more find in sentence.
Furthermore, Bach (1994) says that a word, phrase, sentence or other communication is
ambiguous if it has more than one meaning. Obviously this definition does not say what meanings or
what it is for an expression to have one (or more than one). For a particular language, this information
is provided by a grammar, with systematically pairs form with meanings, ambiguous form with more
than one meaning. For example, the word „light‟ can mean not very heavy or not very dark.
Words like „light‟, „note‟, „bear‟, and „over‟ are lexically ambiguous. They induce ambiguity
in phrases or sentences in which they occur, such as „light suit‟ and the duchess can‟t bear children.
However, phrases and sentences can be ambiguous even if none of constituents is. The phrase
„porcelain egg container, is structurally ambiguous, as is the sentence „the police shot the rioters with
guns‟. Ambiguity can have both a lexical and structural basis, as with sentences like „I left her behind
for you‟ and „He saw her duck‟. (www.sfsu.edu/-kbach/ambiguity.htm-19k).
Katz (1971) states that the phenomenon of semantic ambiguity is multiplicity of senses
versus uniqueness of sense. For example, the fact that the words ‘button’, ‘ball’, ‘foot’, ‘pipe’ have
more than one sense. For example, I have found the button. This sentence, button means as small
round piece of metal or plastic that is sewn onto a piece of cloting and small knob.
Ambiguity, as ordinarily understood, is a case where there is a problem telling one thing from
another, and accordingly, a semantic ambiguity is a case where there are the two senses required to
pose this problem. Furthermore, given that readings represent sense of constituents and that the
number of sense of reasings assigned to a constituent should correctly reflect its degree ambiguity.
The fact that some sentences have no sense, eventhough their individual words are
meaningfull, indicates that the absence of sense, meaninglessness, is the limit of whatever selectional
process gives rise to multiplicity of senses is that ambiguity. Both these consideration suggest that the
account of this process of selection included in the semantic component of a grammar must be in
terms of some mechanism that allows or blocks the formation of a derived reading. Both senses of
„gold‟ can combine with the sense of „chair‟, giving the two senses of the semantically ambiguous
expression „gold chair‟, namely, one of a metal chair and the other of chair of a certain color. But only
the first sense of „gold‟ can
combine with the senses of the other constituents in „white-gold ring‟ to form a sense for the whole,
where as only the second sense of „gold‟ can combine with the sense of „mist‟ to form a sense for
„gold mist‟. Were „gold‟ to have only the first sense, „gold mist‟ would be meaningless.
Although people are sometimes says to be ambiguous in how they use language, and
ambiguity is a property of linguistic expressions like strictly speaking. A word, phrase or sentence is
ambiguous if it has more than one meaning. Obviously this definition does not say what meanings are
or what it is for an expression to have one or more than one. For particular language is provided by a
grammar, which systematically pairs forms with meanings and ambiguous forms with more than one
meaning.
Further Kempson (1980: 34) states that ambiguity is both words and sentences can have more
than one meaning, and the semantic rules a linguist sets up must state correctly for each language
which words and sentence have more than one meaning. The entire sentences will be two-ways
ambiguous, whichever interpretation. More formally, a sentence which is two-ways ambiguous must
be given two semantic representations to characterize its two meanings. For example, „Johnny saw her
duck and Will did to so too‟. Either it means that Johnny saw the duck which belonged to her and Will
also saw the duck which to her; or it means Johnny saw her quickly lower her head and Will also saw
her quickly lower her head.
Form the quotation, it can be concluded that ambiguity is different meaning, which occur in
one expression in the same time.
Types of Ambiguity
Bach (1994) states that there are two types of ambiguity such as lexical and structural
ambiguities. Lexical ambiguity is by far the more common. For examples, chip, pen, suit, call, drawn,
run, deep, dry, and hard. Then the second types is structural ambiguity. It occurs when a phrase or
sentence has more than one underlying structure. For example such a phrase „Tibetan history teacher‟.
This ambiguity are said to be structural because each such phrase can be represented in two
structurally different ways like, Tibetan history//teacher or Tibetan//history teacher. Indeed, the
existence of such ambiguities provides strong evidence for a level of underlying syntactic structure.
Another example is „The chicken is ready to eat‟. Consider the structurally ambiguous sentence which
could be used to describe either a hungry chicken or a broiled chicken. It is arguable that the operative
reading depends on whether or not the implicit subject of the infinitive clause „to eat‟ is tied
anaphorically to the subject „the chicken‟ of the main clause.
It is not always clear when it has a case of structural ambiguity. For example like consider the
elliptical sentence, „Perrot knows a richer man than Trump‟ and that Perot knows man who is richer
than any man Trump knows, and is therefore ambiguous.
Furthermore, Katz (1971: 248) divides ambiguity into four types. They are phonetic
ambiguity, structural ambiguity, lexical ambiguity and referential ambiguity. Each types described as
following:
Phonetic Ambiguity
Phonetic ambiguity occurs in the sound production. In this case the listeners hear the same
sound of one expression but it has different meaning or interpretation of the listener. Katz states that
since the
acoustic unit of speech is the breath group made up of different words become homonymous and thus
potentially ambiguous.
This ambiguity occurs only in spoken language such as direct conversation, in delivering
speech, delivering preach as in any other spoken language situation which consist of speaker (the
potential source of ambiguity) and the listener (the potential people in misinterpreting the meaning of
the expression or utterance). For example the expression „he can can the can‟. The words „can‟ have
the same sound but different meaning. The first shows the ability, the second is to put something into
can and the thing, which is made of metal used as the container of food or liquids.
Structural Ambiguity
A sentence may be ambiguous because of the clause types that are involved. Structural
ambiguity occurs when a phrase or sentence has more than one underlying structure. The ambiguity
stems from the prepositional phrase on the table which can function as an adverb and adjective.
Example: He is eating the fish on the table.
From the sentence, we can see two possible meanings, namely:
a. He is eating the fish which is on the table, and

b. He is eating the fish while sitting on the table.
Indeed, the existence of such ambiguities provides strong evidence for a level of underlying
syntactic structure. Consider the structurally ambiguous sentence, „The chicken is ready to eat‟, which
could be used to describe either a hungry chicken or a broiled chicken. It is arguable that the operative
reading depends on whiter or not the implicit subject of the infinitive clause „to eat‟ is tied
anaphorically to the subject („the chicken‟) of the main of clause. To eliminate the ambiguity, the
translator has to analyze the deep structure and surface structure of the sentence. To do so, the
students should be familiar with the sentence patterns namely:
1. Subject + Verb + Complement (a noun, an adjective, and adverb)

 Mary is in the house
 He is happy
2. Subject + Verb (transitive) + Object
 He studies English
 She reads the book
3. Subject + Verb (transitive) + Object + Adverb (manner, place, time, etc)
 He studies English seriously
Lexical Ambiguity
Sometimes one meaning of a word is derived from another. For example, the cognitive sense
of „see‟ seems derived from its visual sense. The sense of „weight‟ in „He weighed the package‟ is
derived from its sense in „The package weighed two pounds‟. Similarly, the transitive sense of „burn‟,
„fly‟ and „walk‟ are derived from their intransitive senses.
Now, it can be argued that in each of these cases the derived sense does not really qualify as a
second meaning of the word but is actually the result of a lexical operation on the underived sense.
This
argument is plausible to the extent that the phenomenon is systematic and general, rather than peculiar
to particular words. Lexical semantics has the task of identifying and characterizing such systematic
phenomena. It is also concerned to explain the rich and subtle semantic behavior of common and
highly flexible words like the verbs „do‟ and „put‟ and the preposition „at‟, „in‟ and „to‟.
More problems are words whose sense expresses closely related concepts. For example:
 That’s a good hammer.

„good‟ here can mean „useful of functional‟
 This is good soup.

‘good’ here can mean
‘pleasing’
 He is a good
person. ‘good’ here can
mean ‘moral’
 I have a good daughter.

„good‟ here is not clear about which sense is intended.
On the other hand, if a word has more than one meaning in one language, then it is a lexically
ambiguous.
If it is unclear what a referring expression is referring to, then the expression is referentially
ambiguous. For example, a pronoun is a referring expression such as „it‟, „he‟, „they‟, etc. Referential
ambiguity occurs when a speaker has one referent mind for a definite expression.
a. An Indefinite referring expression may be specific or not.

I wanted to buy a magazine
(which magazines? Time, Kawanku, Gadis, Misteri)
b. Anaphora is unclear because a personal pronoun (he, she, it or

they) Can be linked to either of two referring expressions.
Louis told Darto that visitor was waiting for him.
(Him=Lo
uis)
(Him=Da
rto)
c. The pronoun ‘You’ is used generically or

specifically If you want to get ahead, you have to
work hard.
(is „You‟ is the addresses or this sentence a general platitude?)
d. A noun phrase with ‘every’ can be distributed reference or collected

reference. I’m buying a drink to everybody here (one drink for all or for
each).
I. Research Design
This research is conducted with descriptive research method. Descriptive research is intended
to describe, explore and clarify about reality or social phenomena by describing the types of
ambiguity on translation products from English into Bahasa Indonesia.
The population of this study was English texts made by translators around USU Campus. And
the sample of this study was four English texts that are translated by commercial translator around
USU Campus. The translators were determined randomly whereas the four English texts offered to
them to be translated are retrieved from internet. And the translation products were the data for this
analysis.
The data of this study was collected by administrating the English texts. There were two
translators. One translators was asked to translate 4 texts, entitled Historical Introduction,Biography
of Shakespeare, A Framework for the analysis and evaluation of theories of translation and, and
Catwoman. It means that there are eight transltion products. The translators were asked to translate
from English into Indonesian Language.
To analyze the data, the writer took some steps as to learn carefully the eight translation products
by commercial translator, Identifies the ambiguity words., Identifies the the suitable meaning
from the translation products SL to TL. Classifies those into three types of ambiguity based on
Katz‟s theory that is lexical ambiguity, referential ambiguity and structural ambiguity.
In this research, the data is taken from translators‟ translation test. The translators were asked
to translate four different texts, entitle 1.)Historical Introduction, 2) Biography of Shakespeare, 3) A
framework for the Analysis and Evaluation of Theories of Translation and 4) Catwoman. It is used to
know the types of ambiguities which occur in translators‟ translating.
II. The Data Analysis
There are 8 translation products based on four different texts. The original texts are English
texts, entitle Historical Introduction, Biography of Shakespeare, A framework for the Analysis and
Evaluation of Theories of Translation and Catwoman.
Having checked the translator‟s translation, it is important to find out the types of ambiguities
by identifying the data by underlining the ambiguity words, classifying those into three types of
ambiguity meaning based on Katz‟s Theory that is lexical ambiguity, referential ambiguity and
structural ambiguity.
The examples of each ambiguity can be seen as in the

following.
TEXT I
Historical Introduction
Sheltering Arms: The Roots of Child Protection
Michael
Robin The History of childhood is a
nightmare From which we have only
recently begun
To
awaken The History
Of Childhood
Lloyd De Mause
For children there has never been a golden age. Throughout the history of western societies,
children have been killed, abandoned, severely beaten and sexually abused. In fact, the further back
we go in history, the harsher and crueler appears to have been the lot of children. Considered the
property of their parents or the state, children in the past had little resource or protection from adult
society, which frequently rationalized abusive behavior as being for the good of the child. To a large
extend, contemporary concern with child abuse and neglect is the result of redefining child-rearing
practices that have been occurring since time immemorial.
Despite the widespread evidence of child maltreatment in our own time, the history of
children reveals a progressive improvement of their general care, protection and right. Rather than
provide a catalogue of abuse that children have suffered in the past, this introduction proposes that
certain child- learning practices considered abusive today were, when viewed in their social and
historical context, once ”reasonable” ways of dealing with children.
TRANSLATION I
PENGENALAN SEJARAH
TANGAN PERLINDUNGAN : AKAR PERLINDUNGAN ANAK
Sejarah masa anak-anak merupakan pengalaman buruk. Dimana kita mulai bangkit dari
tidur SEJARAH MASA ANAK-ANAK
LLOYD DE MAUSE
Untuk anak-anak, tidak pernah ada era emas. Sepanjang sejarah masyarakat barat, anak-anak
telah banyak dibunuh, diterlantarkan, bahkan dihantam dan dilecehkan secara seksual. Pada
kenyataanya, dengan kembalinya kita ke sejarah, semakin jelas terlihat banyaknya anak-anak yang
mengalami hal demikian. Dengan mempertimbangkan tanah milik orang tuanya maupun status,
anak-anak di masa lalu hanya sedikit mengalami perlindungan dari masyarakat dewasa, yang sering
merasionalisasi perilaku
menyimpang seperti yang diberikan demi kebaikan anak. Sampai skala yang demikian luas, masalah
kontemporer dengan pelecehan dan penelantaran anak adalah hasil pendefenisian atas praktek-praktek
penelentaran anak yang terjadi sejak zaman immemorial.
Meskipun ada bukti yang sedemikian luas tentang kekerasan atau pelecehan anak dalam
zaman kita sendiri, namun sejarah anak-anak menggambarkan peningkatan progresif dari perawatan,
perlindungan dan hak-hak umum mereka. Pengenalan ini bertujuan agar praktek-praktek
pembelajaran anak yang dianggap sebagai pelecehan sekarang ini, bila dipandang dari konteks social
dan sejarah mereka, adalah merupakan cara-cara logis untuk menghadapi anak-anak.
TRANSLATION II
Pendahuluan Historis
Wewenang Perlindungan: Akar dari perlindungan anak
Michael
Robin Sejarah masa anak-anak merupakan mimpi malam yang
menakutkan
Dari sanalah kami mulai
Bangkit
SEJARAH MASA ANAK
LLOYD DE MAUSE
Bagi anak-anak belum ada masa bahagia. Sepanjang sejarah masyarakat barat, anak-anak
dibunuh, disiksa, dipukul dan mengalami pelecehan seksual. Faktanya, semakin jauh kita melihat
sejarah, maka semakin keras dan kasar kehidupan yang dialami sebagian besar anak-anak. Terkait
dengan kekayaan orang tua mereka atau kekayaan Negara, anak-anak pada masa lalu memiliki
perlindungan yang kecil dari masyarakat dewasa dan sering kali orang dewasa menunjukkan adanya
perilaku menyimpang terhadap anak yang katanya demi kebaikan anak tersebut. Memang banyak
kepedulian sementara yang ditujukan kepada anak terkait dengan adanya penyimpangan yang dialami
anak dan kelalaian merupakan hasil dari praktek pengasuhan anak yang sudah terjadi dalam waktu
yang lama sekali.
Disamping keterangan terkait dengan perlakuan yang salah terhadap anak pada masa
sekarang ini, sejak anak menunjukkan adanya perbaikan dalam asuhan yang diberikan secara umum,
perlindungan dan juga hak. Dengan melengkapi catalog penyimpangan yang dialami anak pada masa
lalu, maka pengenalan ini menjelaskan bahwa praktek belajar anak dianggap masih menyimpang
sekarang ini, jika dilihat dari konteks sejarah social dan sejarah serta cara-cara yang layak berkaitan
dengan anak.
Lexical Ambiguity
1. Sentence : Historical Introduction

Translation I : Pengenalan sejarah
Translation II : Pendahuluan
Historis
Explanation : “Introduction” has two interpretations made by translators namely pengenalan

and pendahuluan. It is called lexical ambiguity because the word
Introduction is ambiguous. It is not clear about which sense is intended.
2. Sentence : Sheltering Arms. The Roots of Child

Protection Translation I : Tangan perlindungan. Akar
Perlindungan Anak
Translation II : Wewenang Perlindungan. Akar dari Perlindungan anak.
Explanation : “Arms” has two interpretations made by translators namely tangan and
wewenang. It is called lexical ambiguity because the word Arm is
ambiguous. It is not clear about which sense is intended.
3. Sentence : The History of childhood is a nightmare.

Translation I : Sejarah masa anak-anak merupakanpengalaman buruk,
Translation II : Sejarah masa anak-anak merupakan mimpi malam yang menakutkan,
Explanation :“nightmare” has two interpretations made by translators namely pengalaman

buruk and mimpi malam yang menakutkan. It is called lexical ambiguity
because the word nightmare is ambiguous. It is not clear about which
sense is intended.
4. Sentence : For children there has never been a golden

age. Translation I : Untuk anak-anak, tidak pernah ada era
emas
Translation II : Bagi anak-anak belum ada masa bahagia.
Explanation :“golden” has two interpretations made by translators namely emas and
bahagia. It is called lexical ambiguity because the word golden is
5. Sentence : Considered the property of their parents or the state, children in the past
had little resource or protection from adult society, which frequently
rationalized abusive behavior as being for the good of the child.
Translation I : Dengan mempertimbangkan tanah milik orangtuanya maupun status, anak-

anak di masa lalu hanya sedikit mengalami perlindungan dari masyarakat
dewasa, yang sering sekali merasionalisasi perolaku menyimpang seperti
yang diberikan demi kebaikan anak.
Translation II : Terkait dengan kekayaan orang tua mereka atau kekayaan negara, anak-
anak pada masa lalu memiliki perlindungan yang kecil dari masyarakat
dewasa dan sering kali orang dewasa menunjukkan adanya perilaku
menyimpang terhadap anak yang katanya demi kebaikan anak
tersebut.
Explanation : “property” has two interpretations made by translators namely tanah milik and
kekayaan. It is called lexical ambiguity because the word property is
6. Sentence : Despite the widespread evidence of child maltreatment in our own time,
the history of children reveals a progressive improvement of their
general care, protection and right.
Translation I : Meskipun ada bukti yang sedemikian luas tentang kekerasan atau pelecehan
anak dalam zaman kita sendiri, namun sejarah anak-anak
menggambarkan peningkatan progresif dari perawatan, perlindungan dan
hak-hak umum mereka.
Translation II : Disamping keterangan terkait dengan perlakuan yang salah terhadap anak
pada masa sekarang ini, sejak anak menunjukkan adanya perbaikan
dalam asuhan yang diberikan secara umum, perlindungan dan juga hak.
Explanation : “evidence” has two interpretations made by translators namely bukti and
keterangan. It is called lexical ambiguity because the word evidence is
9. Sentence : Rather than provide a catalogue of abuse that children have suffered in
the past, this introduction proposes that certain child-learning practices
considered abusive today were, when viewed in their social and
historical context, once ”reasonable” ways of dealing with children.
Translation I : Pengenalan ini bertujuan agar praktek-praktek pembelajaran anak yang

dianggap sebagai pelecehan sekarang ini, bila dipandang dari konteks
social dan sejarah mereka, adalah merupakan cara-cara logis untuk
menghadapi anak-anak.
Translation II : Dengan melengkapi catalog penyimpangan yang dialami anak pada masa lalu,
maka pengenalan ini menjelaskan bahwa praktek belajar anak dianggap
masih menyimpang sekarang ini, jika dilihat dari konteks sejarah social
dan sejarah serta cara-cara yang layak berkaitan dengan anak.
Explanation : “reasonable” has two interpretations made by translators namely logis and
layak. It is called lexical ambiguity because the word reasonable is
The lexical ambiguity occurs when the context is insufficient to determine the sense of single word
that has more than one meaning.
Sentence : In fact, the further back we go in history, the harsher and crueler appears to
have been the lot of children.
Translation I : Pada kenyataanya, dengan kembalinya kita ke sejarah, semakin jelas terlihat
banyaknya anak-anak yang mengalami hal demikian.
Translation II : Faktanya, semakin jauh kita melihat sejarah, maka semakin keras dan kasar
kehidupan yang dialami sebagian besar anak-anak.
Evaluation : Sebenarnya, lebih jauh kita tinjau kembali sejarah kekerasan dan kekejaman
kelihatannya telah terjadi pada banyak anak-anak.
The referential ambiguity occurs when the word is unclear what a referring express. In this case,
an indefinite referring expression may be specific or not.
TEXT II
Biography of Shakespeare
William Shakespeare‟s Father, John Shakespeare, moved to the idyllic town of Strafford-
upon- Avon in the mid-sixteenth century, where he became a successful Landowner, moneylender,
wool and agricultural goods dealer, and glover. In 1557, he married Mary Arden. John Shakespeare
lived during a time when the middle class was growing and became increasingly wealthy, thus
allowing its members more freedom and luxuries, and a stronger voice in the local government. He
took advantage of the opportunities afforded him through this social growth, and in 1557 became a
member of the Stratford Council, an event that marked the beginning of an illustrious political career.
By 1561 he was elected one of the town‟s fourteen burgesses, and served successively as constable,
one of two chamberlains, and alderman. In these positions, he administered borough property
revenues.
Translation I
Biografi Shakespeare
Ayah William Shakespeare, John Shakespeare, pindah ke kota yang indah di Stratford-atas-
Avon pada abad pertengahan ke-enambelas, dimana dia menjadi seseorang tuan tanah yang terbesar,
menjadi toke besar, pemilik perusahaan wool dan barang-barang pertanian, sangat terhormat. Pada
1557, dia menikahi Mary Arden. John Shakespeare hidup selama suatu waktu ketika kalangan kelas
menengah semakin banyak dan tak terhitung lagi pihak menjadi orang-orang kaya, hingga
memungkinkan anggota masyarakat disana menjadi lebih bebas dan berkemewahan, dan pengaruh
yang lebih kuat di tingkat pemerintahan daerah. Dia mengambil keuntungan dari peluang yang
diberikan kepadanya melalui pertumbuhan masyarakat, dan pada 1557 menjadi anggota Dewan
Perwakilan Rakyat Stratford, bahkan yang menandai gambaran permulaan karir politik baginya.
Hingga 1561 dia dipilih salah satu dari empat
belas tokoh kota, dan cukup berhasil dalam bekerja, salah satu dari dua bendaharawan kota, dan
anggota senior kota praja, dalam kedudukan ini, dia mengelola banyak harta benda dan kekayaan.
Translation II
Biografi Shakespeare
Ayah William Shakespeare, John Shakespeare pindah ke kota yang damai di Stratfford di
Avon pada pertengahan abad ke enambelas. Disana dia menjadi pemilik tanah yang sukses, yang
meminjamkan uang, dealer wol dan hasil pertanian, dan sarung tangan. Pada 1557, dia menikahi Mary
Arden. John Shakespeare hidup pada masa ketika masyarakat kelas menengah sedang berkembang
dan menjadi semakin kaya dan berusaha membuat anggotanya memiliki kebebasan yang lebih besar
dan hidup senang dan memiliki suara yang lebih vocal dalam pemerintahan. Dia memanfaatkan
peluang yang ada padanya untuk pertumbuhan social, dan pada tahun 1557 menjadi anggota majelis
Stratford, dan inilah sebagai awal darim karir politiknya yang cemerlang. Pada tahun 1561, dia
diangkat sebagai salah satu anggota dewan pembuat undang-undang dan berfungsi untuk menjaga
urusan rumah tangga raja, sebagai polisi dan juga dewan. Dalam posisi tersebut, dia mencatat
pendapatan dari hasil property.
Lexical Ambiguity
1. Sentence : William Shakespeare’s Father, John Shakespeare, moved to the

idyllic town of Strafford-upon-Avon in the mid-sixteenth century,
where he became a successful Landowner, moneylender, wool
and agricultural goods dealer, and glover.
Translation I : Ayah William Shakespeare, John Shakespeare, pindah ke kota yang

indah di Stratford-atas-Avon pada abad pertengahan ke-enambelas,
dimana dia menjadi seseorang tuan tanah yang terbesar, menjadi
toke besar, pemilik perusahaan wool dan barang-barang pertanian,
sangat terhormat.
Translation II : Ayah William Shakespeare, John Shakespeare pindah ke kota yang

damai di Stratfford di Avon pada pertengahan abad ke enambelas.
Disana dia menjadi pemilik tanah yang sukses, yang meminjamkan
uang, dealer wol dan hasil pertanian, dan sarung tangan.
Explanation : “idyllic” has two interpretations made by translators namely indah

and damai. It is called lexical ambiguity because the word idyllic is
ambiguous. It is not clear about which sense is intended
2. Sentence : and a stronger voice in the local government.
Translation I : dan pengaruh yang lebih kuat di tingkat pemerintahan daerah.

Translation II : dan memiliki suara yang lebih vocal dalam pemerintahan.
Explanation :“voice” has two interpretations made by translators namely

pengaruh and suara. It is called lexical ambiguity because the
word voice is ambiguous. It is not clear about which sense is
intended
3. Sentence : In these positions, he administered borough property revenues.
Translation I : dalam kedudukan ini, dia mengelola banyak harta benda dan
kekayaan.
Translation II : Dalam posisi tersebut, dia mencatat pendapatan dari hasil property.
Explanation : “administered” has two interpretations made by translators

namely mengelola and mencatat. It is called lexical ambiguity
because the word administere is ambiguous. It is not clear about
which sense is intended
1. Sentence : John Shakespeare lived during a time when the middle class was growing
and became increasingly wealthy, thus allowing its members more
freedom and luxuries,….
Translation I : John Shakespeare hidup selama suatu waktu ketika kalangan kelas menengah
semakin banyak dan tak terhitung lagi pihak menjadi orang-orang kaya,
hingga memungkinkan anggota masyarakat disana menjadi lebih bebas
dan berkemewahan,…..
Translation II : John Shakespeare hidup pada masa ketika masyarakat kelas menengah sedang
berkembang dan menjadi semakin kaya dan berusaha membuat
anggotanya memiliki kebebasan yang lebih besar dan hidup senang,…
Explanation : “its members” has two interpretations made by translators namely anggota
masyarakat and anggotanya. It is called lexical ambiguity because the
word its is ambiguous. It is not clear about which sense is intended
TEXT III
A Framework for the Analysis and Evaluation of Theories of Translation
The purposes of Translation are so diverse, the text so different, and the receptors so varied
that one can readily understand how and why many distinct formulations of principles and practices of
translation have been proposed. All who have written seriously on translating agree that translators
should know both the source and the receptor languages, should be familiar with the subject matter,
and should have some facility of expression in the receptor language. Beyond the basic requirements
there is little agreement on what constitutes legitimate translating and how the science of linguistics,
or even the knowledge of language structures, can and should be applied.
Translation I
Kerangka Kerja untuk Analisa dan Evaluasi Teori Terjemahan
Ada banyak tujuan dari terjemahan, teksnya begitu berbeda, dan si penerimanya aneka macam
hingga seseorang bisa langsung memahami bagaimana dan kenapa banyak rumusan dasarnya jelas
dan praktek praktek penterjemahan diusulkan. Semua orang yang telah menulis sungguh-sungguh
mengenai terjemahan setuju bahwa para penterjemah perlu mengetahui bahwa sumber daya si
penerima, perlu memiliki kecakapan tentang soal yang dibahas, dan perlu memiliki banyak
pengenalan akan ungkapan dalam bahasa si penerima, selain syarat-syarat dasar ada kesepakatan
mengenai bagaimana menetapkan terjemahan resmi dan bagaimana nilai linguistic sesungguhnya,
atau bahkan pengetahuan struktur bahasa bisa langsung dipakai.
Translation II
Sebuah Kerangka Analisa dan Evaluasi tentang teory terjemahan
Tujuan-tujuan terjemahan begitu beragam, teksnya begitu berbeda, dan penerima begitu
beragam, bahwa seseorang dapat mengerti bagaimana dan mengapa banyak rumusan-rumusan nyata
pada prisip- prinsip dan praktek-praktek terjemahan yang diusulkan. Penulis-penulis teori yang telah
menulis secara serius dalam penterjemahan setuju bahwa penerjemah-penerjemah harus mengetahui
keduanya yaitu sumber dan bahasa target, harus dekat dengan masalah dan harus memiliki beberapa
fasilitas dalam pengekspresiannya, Selain dari persyaratan-persyaratan bagaimana menetapkan
penterjemahan yang masuk akal dan bagaimana ilmu pengetahuan bahasa, atau bahakan pengetahuan
tentang struktur bahasa, dapat dan harus diterapkan.
Lexical Ambiguity
1. Sentence : , should be familiar with the subject matter, and should have some
facility of expression in the receptor language.
Translation I : , perlu memiliki kecakapan tentang soal yang dibahas, dan perlu memiliki
banyak pengenalan akan ungkapan dalam bahasa si penerima,….
Translation II : , harus dekat dengan masalah dan harus memiliki beberapa fasilitas dalam
pengekspresiannya,….
Explanation : “familiar” has two interpretations made by translators namelykecakapan and
dekat. It is called lexical ambiguity because the word familiar is
2. Sentence : Beyond the basic requirements there is little agreement on what

constitutes legitimate translating and how the science of linguistics, or
even the knowledge of language structures, can and should be applied.
Translation I : Selain syarat-syarat dasar ada kesepakatan mengenai bagaiman menetapkan

terjemahan resmi dan bagaimana nilai linguistic sesungguhnya, atau
bahkan pengetahuan struktur bahasa bisa langsung dipakai.
Translation II : Selain dari persyaratan-persyaratan bagaimana menetapkan penterjemahan

yang masuk akal dan bagaimana ilmu pengetahuan bahasa, atau bahakan
pengetahuan tentang struktur bahasa, dapat dan harus diterapkan.
Explanation : “legitimate” has two interpretations made by translators namely resmi and
amsuk akal. It is called lexical ambiguity because the word legitimate is
1. Sentence : All who have written seriously on translating agree that translators should
know both the source and the receptor languages,..
Translation I : Semua orang yang telah menulis sungguh-sungguh mengenai terjemahan

setuju bahwa para penterjemah perlu mengetahui bahwa sumber daya si
penerima,…
Translation II : penulis-penulis teori yang telah menulis secara serius dalam penterjemahan
setuju bahwa penerjemah-penerjemah harus mengetahui keduanya yaitu
sumber dan bahasa target,…
Explanation : “all” has two interpretations made by translators namely semua orang and
penulis-penulis teori. It is called lexical ambiguity because the word all is
TEXT 4
Catwoman
Catwoman : Poor baby, I used to be just like you. A child of the night, wild and free. I was a cat who
walked by herself. And the city was my hunting ground. I prowl through Gotham
each evening, knowing where I liked and take it whatever I wanted. Until I met
him, I gave him my best fight but in the end Kity got her claws clipped. And I
promise I‟ll be a good little pet and walk on a leash even if it killed me.
Visitor : oh you just said, oh beautiful girls!
Translation I
Catwoman
Catwoman : sayangku yang malang, aku hanya ingin menjadi seperti kamu. Seorang anak malam,
buas dan bebas. Aku seekor kucing yang berjalan sendirian. Dan kota adalah lahan
perburuanku. Aku mencari di sepanjang Gotham setiap sore, kutau dimana aku suka
dan mengambil itu apapun yang kumau sampai aku bertemu dia, aku memberikan
dia pertarungan terbaikku tetapi pada akhirnya Kity mendapatkan kukunya dicakar.
Dan aku berjanji aku akan menjadi seekor binatang peliharaan yang baik dan
berjalan pada kesempatan meskipun perjalanan itu membunuku.
Pengunjung : Oh kamu baru saja mengatakannya, Oh gadis cantik !
Translation II
Catwoman : Bayi yang miskin, saya dahulu sama seperti engkau. Anak yang keluyuran malam dan
liar. Saya adalah kucing yang berjalan sendiri. Dan kota adalah lahan perburuanku.
Saya berkeliling di Gotham setiap malam, tahu saya adalah petarung yang terbaik
namun pada akhirnya Kity menencapkan cakarnya. Dan saya berjanji saya akan
menjadi hewan yang sedikit lebih baik dan berjalan walaupun tali pengikat itu
membunuhku.
Pengunjung : Itu katamu, benar-benar gadis yang cantik !
Lexical Ambiguity
1. Sentence : Poor baby, I used to be just like you.

Translation I : sayangku yang malang, aku hanya ingin menjadi seperti
kamu Translation II : bayi yang miskin, saya dahulu sama seperti engkau.
Explanation : “baby” has two interpretations made by translators namely sayangku and
bayi. It is called lexical ambiguity because the word baby is ambiguous. It
is not clear about which sense is intended.
c. Sentence : Poor baby, I used to be just like you.

Translation I : sayangku yang malang, aku hanya ingin menjadi seperti
kamu Translation II : bayi yang miskin, saya dahulu sama seperti engkau.
Explanation : “poor” has two interpretations made by translators namely malang and
miskin. It is called lexical ambiguity because the word poor is ambiguous.
It is not clear about which sense is intended.
1. Sentence : And I promise I’ll be a good little pet and walk on a leash even if it killed me.
Translation I : Dan aku berjanji aku akan menjadi seekor binatang peliharaan yang baik dan
berjalan pada kesempatan meskipun perjalanan itu membunuku.
Translation II : Dan saya berjanji saya akan menjadi hewan yang sedikit lebih baik dan
berjalan walaupun tali pengikat membunuhku.
Explanation : “it” has two interpretations made by translators namely perjalanan and tali
pengikat. It is called lexical ambiguity because the word it is ambiguous. It
is not clear about which sense is intended
Findings
Based on the data analysis, it can be found that two types of ambiguity meaning made by
translators. They are lexical and referential ambiguities. In this study, lexical ambiguity is the most
dominant. The reason for this dominant is most of the translators confuse to use a word because it has
more than one meaning. Lexical ambiguity arises when context is insufficient to determine the sense
of single word that has more than one meaning. In other word, when homonyms can occur in the same
position in utterance, the result is lexical ambiguity. It is believed that the ambiguity meaning is
caused by the complicated of the meaning of the sentences.
COCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
The Conclusion
After analyzing the data above, some conclusion were drawn as in the following:
a. The most dominant type of ambiguity meaning found in translators’ translation is lexical
ambiguity.
b. The causes of ambiguity meaning made by translators in their translation is caused by their
unknown the culture and context of the text, so the message or meaning transferred is not
equal to that in original text. And they always translate English text by word of word.
Translating a text from the source language to the target language is not easy. It is requires
some skill and much knowledge. Having seen the result of, the writer suggest, English teachers to
teach ambiguity meaning as well as they motivate students to understand the meaning of the sentences
in teaching learning English. The translators‟ difficulties in translation should be overcome as soon as
possible to increase translators‟ skill.
REFERENCES
Bloomfield, L.1953. Language and Languages. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston
Baker, M. 1992. In Other Words: A Course Book on Translation. London: Routledge
Brislin, R.W. 1976. Translation: Application and Research. New York: Garden Press,
Inc Catford, J.C.1965. A Linguistic theory of Translation. London: Oxford University
Press
Corder, S.P. 1973. Introducing Applied Linguistic. Great Britain: Hazell Watson and Viney
Ltd Hornby, A.S. 1996. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Oxford: University Press
Larson, Mildred L. 1984. Meaning Based Translation. USA: University Press of America,
inc Newmark, P.1981. Approaches to Translation. New York: Pergamon Press
Bassnett- McGuire,S. 1991. Translation Studies. New York: Methuen & Co.Ltd
Nida, E.a and Taber, C.R. 1982. The theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E.J.Brill
Bach, K. 1994. Coversational Implicature, Mind and Language
(www.sfsu.edu/-kbach/ambiguity.htm- 19k).
Katz, J.J. 1971. Semantic Theory. New York : Massachusets Institute of
Technology Widyamarta, A.1989. Seni Menerjemahkan. Yokyakarta: Penerbit
Kainisius
VIVID: JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE - VOL. 6 NO. 2 (2017)
Available online at : http://jurnalvivid.fib.unand.ac.id
Vivid: Journal of Language and Literature

| ISSN (Online) 2502-146X |
Linguistics
Untranslatability Found in J.K. Rowling’s English Novel Harry Potter

and The Sorcerer’s Stone and Its Indonesian Version
Mayra Susanti 1, Novalinda 2
English Department, Faculty of Humanities, Andalas University
ARTICLE INFORMATION ABSTRACT
Received: June 10, 2017 This research is about the problem of untranslatability in the
Revised: August 03, 2017 translation of novel Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone by J.K.
Available online: September 27, 2017 Rowling. The intention is what are the types of untranslatability,
the causes and how the translator solves the problem of
untranslatability that happen in this novel. From 27 data, the
KEYWORDS researcher finds two types of untranslatability in the novel Harry
Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone by J.K. Rowling: linguistic
Untranslatability, types of untranslatability and cultural untranslatability. Then there are nine
untranslatability, the cause of causes of untranslatability found in the novel. The cause is
untranslatability, translation strategies dominated by the culture-specific words or phrases which are
semantically complex. From the analysis, it is found that the
CORRESPONDENCE
translator tend to use the loan word or loan word plus explanation
E-mail: mayrasusanti@gmail.com strategy to solve the problem of untranslatability in this novel.
INTRODUCTION
Translations nowadays commonly used in daily life to accommodate many aspects, whether in
jurnalistic, advertisement, entertainment, and literatures. As explained by Munday [1],
“translation is the process of interpreting signs, verbal or non-verbal, from one language to
another”, the process itself called translating. The equivalence between source language and
target language is the aim of translation.
The translator should be aware of the condition of the target language, the culture and
grammatical differentiations that will affect the process of translating a text. Since translation is
to define the equivalence meaning in the process, the translator always meets one of the major
problems in translating, which is the untranslatability.
I choose untranslatability terms as the object of the study Indonesian and English have many
differences; in word order, grammar, expression, and culture. Occasionally, there are no
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International. Some rights
reserved
VIVID: JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE - VOL. 6 NO . 2 (2017)
equivalence terms between the languages that can represent the term into the other which make the
untranslatability happen.
There are three primary purposes in this research:
1. To find the types of untranslatability which was found in the novel

2. To find the causes of the untranslatability terms
3. To find the strategies which are applied in translating the untranslatability terms
Untranslatability
Catford [2] state that untranslatability or translation fails occurs when it is impossible to build
functionally relevant features of the situation into the contextual meaning of the target language text.
While Baker [3] named this phenomenon as non-equivalence terms, she said “ non- equivalence at
word level means that the target language has no direct equivalent for a word which occur in the
source text”. She explains that non-equivalence arises from many semantic complications.
In her journal, Cui [4] defines untranslatability as a property of a text or of any utterance, in one
language, for which no equivalent text or utterance found in another language. Contrary to popular
belief, the words are not either translatable or untranslatable. They are only words, and these words less
more or hard translate depends on their nature and the translator‟s skills. Quite often, a text or utterance
that is considered to be “untranslatable” is actually a lacuna, or lexical gap, that is to say that there is no
one-to-one equivalence between the word, expression or turn of phrase in the source language and
another word, expression or turn of phrase in the target language. A translator, however, can resort to a
number of translation procedures to compensate.
Catford distinguishes two types of untranslatability, which he called as linguistic and cultural
untranslatability [2].
1. Linguistic Untranslatability
It occurs when there is no lexical or syntactical substitute in the target text for a source text
item. Linguistic untranslatability happened because the failure to find a target text equivalent
is due entirely to differences between the source text and the TT. In Indonesian, the linguistic
untranslatability is due to grammatical matter. I applies theory of Grammatical Categories by
Palmer [5] to make boundaries with cultural untranslatability. It deals with gender, number,
person, tense, mood, voice and case. For example, the particle “the” in Indonesia mostly
omitted since it was not recognized in Indonesian and it didn‟t affect the translation.
2. Cultural Untranslatability
It occurs due to the absence in the target text culture of a relevant situational feature for the
source text. This type of untranslatability deals with culture differences between English and
Indonesian. As the indicator, I applies translation and culture theory by Newmark [6]. The
differences including ecology, material culture, social culture,
86
customs and habits. For example the term of „phoenix’ or often called as the firebird. In
Indonesia, there is no creature which has similar ability and similar appearance with phoenix,
even though some literature commonly translate it into „burung api‟ considering to its ability.
According to Baker [3], the untranslatability are caused by eleven reasons: culture-
specific concept, the source-language concept is not lexicalized in the target
language, the source-language word semantically complex , the source and target
languages make different distinctions in meaning , target language lack of
superordinate, target language lacks a specific term, differences in physical or
interpersonal perspective, differences in expressive meaning, differences in form,
differences in frequency and purpose of using specific forms, and the use of loan
words in the source text.
She also give eight strategies in solving the problem of untranslatability: translation
by a more general word (superordinate), translation by a more neutral or less
expressive word, translation by cultural substitution, translation using a loan word or
loan word plus explanation, translation by paraphrase using a related word,
translation by paraphrase using unrelated words, translation by omission and
translation by illustration.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In this research, whisperers was classified as linguistically untranslatable due to the case matter. Suffix –
ers in whisperers consist of two suffixes, -er and –s. Suffix –er in English have several functions.
When it associated with an adjective or adverb, it used to form the comparative degree of adjectives
and adverbs of one or more syllables such in hotter and beautifuller. And when it was associated with
a noun, it refers to the person or thing belonging to or associated with something such in traveller,
New Yorker.
While for suffix –s, as it already explained in previous datum, it also has several functions, to express
the plural forms of nouns, to form adverbs denoting usual or repeated action or state, and to form the
third person singular present.
This untranslatable happen because it was differences in form. Term whisperers in this
datum is translated into mereka yang berbisik-bisik. In Indonesian, mereka is a pronoun
refers to the third person plural. While berbisik-bisik means a repeated and continual action.
To solve it, the translator use translation by paraphrase using a related word strategy. Suffix – er in
whisperers is a noun suffix which refers to people who do whispering. And for suffix –s, it shows
more than one person who whispers and was a continual action. The term whisperers also can translate
into para pembisik in Indonesian, where para is pointed to suffix –s as plural marker and pembisik is
pointed to whisperer. This way was more simple than mereka yang berbisik-bisik.
And bezoar is considered as culturally untranslatable because the ecology differences. As explained in
the novel, a bezoar is a stone-like mass taken from the stomach of animal that acts as an antidote to
most poisons. Beside stomach, it also can be found in esophagus, large intestine, and trachea. But,
only bezoar taken from goat and cow are used for medical reasons.
87
The Chinese herbologist is commonly used bezoar taken from cows for healing and as an antidote.
While in the novel, Rowling use goat bezoar as the antidote.
This untranslatability happens because the use of loan words in the source text since it derived from
Persian pād-zahr (‫)پادزهر‬, which literally means "antidote". In Indonesia, there are two terms to call
bezoar. For doctor, pharmacist, tabib and those who dealt in the medical environment, it used to called
as bezoar. While for common people in some areas in Sumatra, they used to call it batu kambing
because it was taken from goat‟s stomach. But medically it only known as bezoar.
Although it has a general term used by common people, but the translator still used translation using a
loan word plus explanation strategy to handle this problem. The translator should be more aware about
the target reader which are children and teenagers whose does not have much knowledge about medical
and botanical term. It will be more easy for the target reader to understand bezoar as batu kambing,
unless there is no equivalent terms that can express its term.
CONCLUSIONS
From the analysis of untranslatability presented in the previously, I concludes that there are
two types of untranslatability as proposed by Catford in the novel Harry Potter and the
Sorcerer’s Stone by J.K. Rowling. The two types are linguistic untranslatability and cultural
untranslatability. From eleven causes of untranslatability propose by Baker, there are nine
causes found in the novel, such as : the culture-specific concept, the source-language word
semantically complex, target language lack of superordinate, target language lack a specific
term, differences in physical or interpersonal perspective, differences in expressive meaning,
differences in form, differences in frequency and purpose of using specific forms and the use
of loan words in the source text.
The cause of untranslatability in this novel is dominated by the culture-specific words or phrases
which are semantically complex which are found in five data and the case of target language lacks a
specific term and differences in form are found in four data. Then, the target language lacks
superordinate as found in three data. While the case of differences in expressive meaning, differences in
physical or interpersonal perspective and the use of loan words in the source text are found in two
data. Only one data found which used differences in frequency and purpose of using specific forms
strategy.
To solve the problem of untranslatabilty, the translator uses some strategies as proposed by Baker
(1992). In this novel, it is found that there are five strategies used by the translator to handle the
untranslatability. First, translation using a loan word or loan word plus explanation strategy found in
seventeen data (in datum 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 25, 26, and 27).
Unfortunately, although there are equivalent terms that can used to translate it, the translator choose to
use a loan word strategy to solve it. This strategy might used in order to keep the real meaning of the
terms, but since the target reader is children and teenagers the translator also should consider their
ability in interpreting the meaning.
88
Second, translation by paraphrase using a related word strategy found in five data (in datum 2, 3, 5, 7,
and 22). This strategy used due to lack of an exact match to the target language vocabulary. Third,
translation by a more general word strategy found in two data (in datum 1 and 6). This strategy is used
because the target language lack of a specific term, so the use of a more general word will help reader
to follow the novel plot. Fourth, translation by omission strategy found in two data (in datum 4 and
14). This strategy used by translator since the term in the source language is not recognized in
Indonesian. And last, there is only one data using translation by a more neutral or less expressive word
strategy (in datum 8). This strategy used by the translator because differences in expressive meaning
between source language and target language.
The untranslatability in this novel happen because the grammatical matters and cultural differences.
Linguistic untranslatability occurs when a term in English text lost one or some sense-component
when it translated into Indonesian text. And when a term in the English text has differences in word
order and articles with the Indonesian text. As for the cultural untranslatability, it happen because
cultural differences between Indonesian and English culture, which including the differences of
ecology, material culture, social culture, customs and habits.
REFERENCES
[1] Jeremy Munday, Introducing Translation Studies Theories and applications, 1st ed.
London: Routledge, 2001.
[2] J. C. Catford, A Linguistic Theory of Translation, 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1965.
[3] Mona Baker, In Other Words A coursebook on translation, 1st ed. New York: Routledge.
[4] J. Cui, “Untranslatability and the Method of Compensation,” Theory Pract. Lang. Stud.,
vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 826–830, 2012.
[5] Frank Palmer, Grammar, 2nd ed. Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1984.
[6] P. Newmark, A TEXTBOOK OF TRANSLATION. New York: Prentice Hall, 1988.
89

Name: Eka Fitriana NPM: 1911040324 Class: 5E Translation Practice For Academic Context

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Name: Eka Fitriana NPM: 1911040324 Class: 5E Translation Practice For Academic Context

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Name: Eka Fitriana NPM: 1911040324 Class: 5E Translation Practice For Academic Context

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Name : EKA FITRIANA

Translation practice for academic context

1. Definition ambiguity in translation according to 3 experts!

Selvyane.I.Lumban Batu, Erika Sinambela, Caroline Pakpahan

Newmark (1981:170) says that accuracy in communicative translation basically lexical.

to understanding the problem of translation. There are:

An interlinear translation is a completely literal translation. For some purpose, it is desirable

1). If they add extraneous information not in the source

text. 2). If they change the meaning of Source

Unduly free translation in English:

Unduly free translation in Bahasa Indonesia:

Rank-bound translation is translation is translation in which the selection of TL equivalent is

1. Intralingual translation (rewording) is an interpretation of verbal signs by means of other

There are seven process of translation, and they are:

Ambiguity is commonly occurred in written language. It because written language doesn‟t

Example: He is eating the fish on the table.

From the sentence, we can see two possible meanings, namely:

a. He is eating the fish which is on the table, and

1. Subject + Verb + Complement (a noun, an adjective, and adverb)

 That’s a good hammer.

 This is good soup.

 I have a good daughter.

a. An Indefinite referring expression may be specific or not.

(which magazines? Time, Kawanku, Gadis, Misteri)

b. Anaphora is unclear because a personal pronoun (he, she, it or

Louis told Darto that visitor was waiting for him.

c. The pronoun ‘You’ is used generically or

(is „You‟ is the addresses or this sentence a general platitude?)

d. A noun phrase with ‘every’ can be distributed reference or collected

II. The Data Analysis

The examples of each ambiguity can be seen as in the

Robin The History of childhood is a

nightmare From which we have only

awaken The History

TANGAN PERLINDUNGAN : AKAR PERLINDUNGAN ANAK

tidur SEJARAH MASA ANAK-ANAK

Wewenang Perlindungan: Akar dari perlindungan anak

Robin Sejarah masa anak-anak merupakan mimpi malam yang

Dari sanalah kami mulai

SEJARAH MASA ANAK

1. Sentence : Historical Introduction

Explanation : “Introduction” has two interpretations made by translators namely pengenalan

2. Sentence : Sheltering Arms. The Roots of Child

Translation II : Wewenang Perlindungan. Akar dari Perlindungan anak.

3. Sentence : The History of childhood is a nightmare.

Translation II : Sejarah masa anak-anak merupakan mimpi malam yang menakutkan,

Explanation :“nightmare” has two interpretations made by translators namely pengalaman

4. Sentence : For children there has never been a golden

Translation II : Bagi anak-anak belum ada masa bahagia.

Translation I : Dengan mempertimbangkan tanah milik orangtuanya maupun status, anak-

Translation I : Pengenalan ini bertujuan agar praktek-praktek pembelajaran anak yang

1. Sentence : William Shakespeare’s Father, John Shakespeare, moved to the

Translation I : Ayah William Shakespeare, John Shakespeare, pindah ke kota yang

Translation II : Ayah William Shakespeare, John Shakespeare pindah ke kota yang

Explanation : “idyllic” has two interpretations made by translators namely indah

2. Sentence : and a stronger voice in the local government.

Translation I : dan pengaruh yang lebih kuat di tingkat pemerintahan daerah.

Explanation :“voice” has two interpretations made by translators namely

3. Sentence : In these positions, he administered borough property revenues.