Oleh :
Indiyah Imran
Ni Luh Putu Setiarini
Ati Sumiati
Anita
GunadarmaUniversity
ABSTRACT
The research entitled “An Error Analysis in Translating English from Indonesian”, may contribute in solving one of the translation problems. Students find translating Indonesian to English much more difficult than the reverse. As difficulty may manifest in errors, translation teachers, students, and practitioners may learn the stumbling blocks of translation.
Based on the research questions: what are the errors and the cause of errors in translating English from Indonesian? Besides, the application of 6 working theories, such as 1) error analysis, 2) errors, 3) classification of errors, 4) discourse errors, 5) interlingual and intralingual errors, and 6) the differentiation of discourse, syntactic, and lexical errors. This research aims to describe the discourse, syntactic, and lexical errors. Besides, explaining the cause of errors.
The instrument consists of 17 texts as source language. Each text consists of several paragraphs which form a discourse. The paragraphs are from Pramoedya Ananta Toer’s novel, entitled “Perawan Remaja dalam Cengkeraman Militer”. The translators are S2 students from the Translation Department, Gunadarma University. Data is located in the students’ English translation as target language.
Data are classified into 1) discourse errors, 2) syntactic errors, and 3) lexical errors. The last mentioned is the highest 56 %, followed by syntactic errors 36 %, and the least are the discourse errors 8 %. Discourse errors are classified into partial and entire discourse errors. Syntactic errors are classified into 1) sentence function, 2) tenses, 3) word order, 4) agreement rules, and 5) construction. Each sub-class is further sub sub-classified. Tense errors are the highest 50 %, followed by construction errors 31 %. Lexical errors are sub-classified into: 1) misselection of words 2) derivational suffixes, and 3) function words. Errors in misselection of words are the highest 72 %, followed by errors in function words 23 %, and the least are errors in derivational suffixes 5 %. The sub-class is also further sub sub-classified.
INTRODUCTION
Background
Students are reluctant to translate Indonesian into English, because it is much more difficult than the reverse. As difficulty may manifest in errors, this research may contribute in solving one of the translation problems. By understanding the major English translation errors, teachers, students, and practitioners may learn the pitfalls of translating Indonesian into English.
Three previous researches, which are related to translation and error analysis made this research more aware of what aspects in the research, need more highlighting or deeper insights.
Research Question and Aim of the Research
Based on two research questions 1) what are the students’ errors in translating English from Indonesian and 2) what cause the errors, and with the application of the working theories, this research aims to 1) describe the discourse errors, syntactic errors, and lexical errors 2) explain cause of the errors which may be interlingual or intralingual.
Working Theories
The working theories are 1) error analysis (Ubol, 1981:8): a systematic description and explanation of students’ errors or language user, in using the target language, either spoken or written. This theory is applied in the discussion of the errors. After presenting some errors, the next phase is the description of the errors, then it is followed by an explanation of the cause of errors, 2) the theory of errors (Dulay and Krashen in James, 1998:93), are any violation of a language rule, unacceptable linguistic form, or wrong connotation. In this research, if a sentence has more than four errors, the sentence is considered as faulty data, 3) type of errors (Langacker, 1972; Dulay in James 1998) consist of phonology, graphology, grammar, lexis, text or discourse. This research differentiates three types of errors, discourse, syntactic, and lexical. 4) Interlingual and intralingual errors (Richards, 1974; James, 1998) have different sources of errors. The first is a transfer of the source language into the target language. The latter has the source in the target language. The translator does not master the target language well, so that he may make a false generalization, an incomplete application of a linguistic rule, or simply ignorance of the linguistic rules of the target language. These theories are applied in the explanation of the cause of errors. 5) Discourse analysis (Murcia and Olshtain, 2000: 4) studies language use that extends beyond sentence boundaries. 6) Discourse (Kridalaksana, in Sumarlan, 2003:5) is a complete form of writing which may be a novel, an article, a paragraph/s, a sentence/s, or even a word which contributes a complete meaning to the context. 7) Differentiating Discourse, Syntactic, and Lexical Errors. The definition for discourse, syntax, and lexicon are clearly distinctive, but to differentiate errors in those three levels are not easy.
Compare these three sentences:
Error Correction
a). We were driven into a subterranean fort. bunker
b). There was no savior. nobody to help
c). She___ called Sumiati. was called
In sentence a, the error involves only one or two words and does not involve the whole meaning of the sentence (this is a lexical error). The error is in choosing between two words, which are synonyms. Bunker is better, as subterranean is usually for rivers, springs, and lakes. In sentence b, it is an error of register, because savior is in the register of church discourse, such as, “Jesus is my savior”. For daily discourse, the word help is more appropriate. So, sentence b is a discourse error. Sentence c is a syntactic error, as it involves the whole aspect of the sentence. “She called Sumiati”, the sentence is active, on the other hand, “She was called Sumiati” the sentence is passive. In the Source Language (SL), “Ia bernama Sumiati.”
Method and Technique of Research
The instrument to collect data consists of 17 texts. Each text consists of several paragraphs, which form a discourse. The paragraphs are from Pramoedya Ananta Toer’s novel “Perawan Remaja dalam Cengkeraman Militer.” Then, the students (Gunadarma S2 students) translated the text, which is in the source language (Indonesian) into the target language (English). Source of the data is the students’ English translation. The data are the errors, which the students made in their English translation. By using the qualitative and descriptive method, data are collected by using those instruments mentioned above, and are further classified into discourse errors, syntactic errors, and lexical errors. Those three classes of errors are further sub-classified and sub-sub classified. Interpretations of the data are in the discussion sections.
2. DISCOURSE ERRORS
2.1. Introduction
The theories applied here are Kridalaksana in Sumarlan and Murcia-Olshtain’s which have been mentioned before. Data are classified in 1) partial discourse errors and 2) entire discourse errors. The first involves a word or words, sentence and paragraph. The latter involves more than one paragraph or the whole text.
Discourse errors are the smallest, 25 or 8%. The partial discourse errors are 15 and the entire discourse errors are 10. Partial discourse errors comprise register, incohesive sentence errors and personal pronouns. Entire discourse error comprises tense errors. This paper will not discuss register errors.
2.2 Partial Discourse Errors
2.2.1. Incohesive Sentence Errors
Examples:
Error Correction
(1) The complex relationship between navy the difficulty of sea and
Sulitnya hubungan laut dan air transport
and airmade the Dai Nippon
udara menyebabkan balatentara
army unable to get
Dai Nippon tak lagi bisa
hostesses from Japan, China and Korea.
mendatangkan wanita penghibur
dari Jepang, Cina, dan Korea.
(2) By using German strategy,
Dengan menggunakan taktik Jerman,
Japan launched a sudden war blitz krieg
Jepang melancarkan perang kilat
to South East Asia.
keAsia Tenggara.
Discussion
In sentence 1, the first half of the sentence is incohesive with the second half. The first half is the cause, while the second is the effect. “The complex relationship between navy and air” is incohesive with “not able to get hostesses from Japan, China, and Korea,” but the correction is “the difficulty of sea and air transport” makes the sentence cohesive as a cause and effect sentence. In sentence 2, the word in sudden war anaphorically refers to German strategy. And, the German strategy (of war) exophorically refers to blitz krieg. That is why sudden war must be replaced by blitz krieg to make the sentence cohesive.
The cause of errors is that the translator did not read the whole sentence to understand its meaning, and after translating they did not reread.
2.2.2 Personal Pronoun Errors
As the previous errors are endophoric the personal pronoun errors are exophoric or the reference is in the adjacent sentence/s.
Error Correction
(3) 1st line “Don’t call Yako with its name, Sir.” me that “Jangan panggil saya dengan nama itu, Pak.”
2nd line “ It is not my name.”
“Itu bukan nama saya.”
(4) 1st line “(…) he said in his mother tongue (…) she her
“(…) ia berkata dalam bahasa ibunya(…)
4th line “If your husband is not at home, don’t
“Kalau suamimu tidak di rumah, jangan
go far away from home.”
pergi jauh-jauh”
Discussion
The personal pronouns of sentence 2 in the first line and the one in the second line are incohesive, because there is a cataphoric relationship between the first and the second line. So, sentence 2 should be, “Don’t call me (Yako) with that name, Sir.”
The personal pronoun in sentence 3 on the 1st line is incohesive too. The inference of your husband is husband is male and your is the wife or she. So, sentence 3 should be “(…) she said in her mother tongue.”
2.3 Entire Discourse Errors
These errors may involve more than one paragraph or the entire discourse. They are all tense errors.
Error Correction
(5) Line 10 It isn’t much to write, wasn’t
Dari pertemanan kedua itu tak banyak
after the second meeting
yang dapat dikutip.
(6) Line 13 (…) her parents refuse refused
(…) orang tuanya menolak
Tense reference: In 1994, I was 14 years old
Line 10: Pada 1944, berumur 14 tahun
Discussion
Sentence 6 in text 8 is one example of tense error. It should be in past tense. The entire text 8 is written in the simple present tense. Text 7 has some sentences right and some are wrong. The cause of errors is that the translator did not read and understand the entire text before translating, because in the text there are sentences that can give a clue to the right tense.
3. SYNTACTIC ERRORS
In this research, data of syntactic errors are 36%. The errors are classified into sentence function, tenses, word order, agreement rules, and construction. Tense errors are the highest, 50 or 50%, then it is followed by construction errors 31 or 26,05%. Only the first and the second highest total number of errors are to be discussed. The difference between grammatical rules between Indonesian and English constitutes the reason of errors in translating the text, particularly errors in translating tenses and construction. Errors in construction are due to interlingual and intralingual error.
Errors in tenses are classified into wrong choice and inconsistency in the use of tenses. The percentages of errors in wrong choice 45 or 38%, inconsistency errors are 5 or 4,23%.
3.1 Errors of Tenses
3.1.1. Errors of Tense Misselection
Error Correction
(7) (…) she asks politely with tears streaming asked
down her face.
(…) ia memohon dengan air mata bercucuran.
(8) The boat stops at one island after the other. stopped
Kapal tersebut menyinggahi pulau demi pulau.
Discussion
The tense used in sentence 7 and 8 should be in simple past tense. In expressing tense besides using adverbial time, English also uses the change of verb form in accordance to time. Meanwhile Indonesian express tenses by use adverbial time only, e.g., kemarin, sekarang, besok.
3.1.2 Errors in Inconsistency Use of Tense
Error Correction
(9) She began to understand what is really happening to was
them.
Mulailah ia mengerti apa yang sesungguhnya terjadi.
(10) Those who didn’t get a turn have to wait (…). had
Mereka yang belum mendapat giliran harus.
menunggu (…).
Discussion
In sentence 9, the verb is should be was because the preceding verb is began. In sentence 10, students made error in using have. It should be had, because the proceeding verb is didn’t. The errors are due to the influence of the source language. The Indonesian verbs do not change whether it is in the part, present or in the future. In Indonesian tenses is indicated by adverbial time such as kemarin, sekarang, besok, lusa, etc.
3.2Errors of Construction
Construction errors are second highest 31 or 27%. Construction means a grammatical pattern consisting of two or more immediate constituents (Agnes, 2002:313). In this research, construction errors can be classified into (1) passive and active errors, (2) apostrophe ‘s and compound words, (3) ellipsis, and (4) verb+ing.
In this paper only the first and the second type of errors are discussed.
3.2.1 Errors of Passive and Active Construction
Error Correction
(11) When Japan surrendered they neglected. were neglected
Ketika Jepang menyerah mereka ditelantarkan.
(12) “You will be grabbed by the wicked men” The wicked men
“Nanti kamu disambar orang-orang jahat” will grab you
Discussion
In English, the passive construction consists of to be + past participle. The translator left out to be in translating passive sentences. They cannot distinguish between active and passive constructions. It is due to interlingual interference. In the source language active and passive verbs are indicated by morpheme, i.e. me-, ber, for active and di-, ter- for passive. Indonesian has tendency to have passive sentences, while English has the tendency to have active sentences. For example sentence number 12 is not wrong grammatically, but it sounds unnatural. The translator tends to translate the text literally.
3.2.2 Errors of Apostrophe ‘s
Error Correction
(13) Sumiati tears started to flow Sumiati’s tears
Air mata Sumiati mulai bercucuran
(12) The Japanese’s troops were transferred Japanese troops
to the front
Balatentara Jepang dipindah ke garis depan
Discussion
In sentence 11 the translator does not add inflectional suffix ‘s (apostrophe ‘s) and the error of sentence no 12 is caused by superfluous use of apostrophe ‘s after Japanese. We do not need to put apostrophe ‘s because the head word of the phrase is troops instead of Japanese. However in Sumiati’s tears the headword is Sumiati so that we should add apostrophe ‘s after Sumiati. The causes of errors are intralingual, as the translator cannot differentiate the position of the headword in a genetive and compund word construction.
4. LEXICAL ERRORS
4.1. Introduction
Lexicon is the set of all the words and idioms of any language, while word is the smallest of the linguistic units which can occur on its own in speech or writing (Richards; Platt, et al, 1985: 165) and in writing words are separated by spaces. Lexicon consists of content words and function words (Murcia and Olshtain, 2000: 76). Although function words are included into grammatical markers and have grammatical meaning, this research classifies error of function words as lexical errors, because errors in function words involve only one word. On the contrary, errors in syntax involve more than one word or the whole sentence. Morpheme is the smallest phonological units that recur with constant meaning (Langacker, 1972: 41). This paper also classified derivational suffixes into sub category of lexical errors, because all errors occurred only in derivational suffixes. Translators tend to change or leave out the derivational suffixes. Derivational suffixes may change the word-class of the word base—i.e. nouns can become verbs, and adjectives can be derived from nouns. (Haspelmath, 2002: 68).
In this research, lexical errors are classified into three subclasses 1) errors in misselection of words, 2) errors in function words and 3) errors in derivational suffixes. Among those three subcategories, 1) errors in misselection of words are the highest 72%, followed by 2) errors in function words 23%, and the least is 3) errors in derivational suffixes 5%. As for the cause of errors in the lexical errors, interlingual errors or errors influenced by source language interference is the highest 72%, meanwhile errors caused by intralingual or by target language interference is 28%. Sub-category of errors in misselection of words are further sub sub-classified into three, they are misselection of: 1) words which have different meaning (45%), 2) words which have similar meaning (22%), and 3) idiomatic expression (6%). Errors in function words are sub sub-classified into: 1) absence of function words (13%), 2) misselection of function words 7%, and 3) superfluous use of function words (8%). Errors in derivational suffixes are 5%. Not all errors in the sub categories will be discussed, only the first highest and the second are discussed.
4.2. Errors in Misselection of Words
Errors: Correction
(13). “(…) to become a soldier to defend officer
“(…) untuk jadi perwira dan mempertahankan
his fatherland from the alliance attack.”
tanah airnya dari serangan sekutu.”
(14). “(…) and they didn’t have the heart
“(…) dan mereka tidak sampai hati
to stain the family name.” dishonor
mencemari nama keluarga”
Discussion
In sentence 13, the error is caused by misselection of words which have different meaning. The translator is using a more general term where a more specific one is needed (superonym for hyponym), the result is an underspecification of the meaning (James, 1998: 151). An officer and a soldier have different rank in the army, where officer is higher than soldier, so the translator has to be careful in dealing with these terms. The sentence should read, “(…) to become an officer to defend his fatherland.” In sentence 14, it is the errors in misselection of words which have similar meaning. The translator uses the wrong one from a set of near-synonyms causes the error. The word stain means being disgrace or damage to somebody’s reputation, change the color of something (Oxford, 1989:1246), but based on the context the correct word should be dishonor which means loss of honor or respect or bring dishonor to a family (Oxford, 1989:345).
Both sentences are very much influenced by the interference of TL (intralingual). The translator’ ignorance of a TL form can lead to false analogy. The translator wrongly assumes that the TL word behaves like SL words (James, 1998: 185).
4.3. Errors in Function Words
Error Correction
(15) “I am one of ___ 22 girls from the same home town.” the
“ Saya adalah salah seorang dari 22 gadis dari
kampung yang sama”
Discussion
Sentence 15 is an example of error caused by absence of function word. The translator leaves out the article in the sentence. The article the functioning as adverb to explain the definite noun phrase of the word 22 girls. So the article the in the above sentence must be exist. The cause of error is source language interference (interlingual), there is no article in the target language while it is required in the source language to replace the word ‘dari’ and also because source language function words is less than function words in target language.
4.4. Errors in Derivational Suffixes
Error Correction
(16) “(…) as entertain for the Japanese soldiers.” entertainment
“(…) sebagai hiburan para serdadu Jepang.”
Discussion
In this example, the translator did not change the word class from verb into noun also, instead the translator change the word class into verb form. This is wrong since what is intended from this text is hiburan (noun form in source language), and then we should retain the form of noun in the target language as entertainment.
This error in sentence 16 is caused by interference of the target language (intralingual) that is the ignorance of translator in recognizing the existence of word classes by suffixation.
5. CONCLUSION
The data in this research gave evidence to the research questions: (1) what are the student errors in translating English from Indonesian? And (2) what are the cause of the errors?
The research presented three classes of errors, discourse, syntactic, and lexical errors. The lexical errors are the highest, followed by the syntactic errors, and the least are the discourse errors. The last needs more insights, so that the data can be better interpreted.
The major cause of errors is that translators do not read the entire text to understand its meaning and its content before translating and reread after translating. As lexical errors are the highest it means that the translators do not read much English. Interlingual errors occur more than intralingual. Differentiating those two are not always easy.
Suggestion
A translator should be more aware of the important role of discourse in translation. This research had better be followed by an error analysis of translating Indonesian from English. So far, we take it for granted that Indonesians do well in translating English into Indonesian.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Crowell, Thomas Lee Jr., 1964, “Index to Modern English” London: Mcgraw-Hill Inc.
Greenbaum, Sidney and Quirk, Randolph, 1990, “A Student’s Grammar of the English Language”, England: Pearson Education Ltd.
Hatim, Basil. 2001. “ Teaching and Researching Translation”. England: Pearson Education Ltd.
James, Carl. 1998. “Errors in Language Learning and Use Exploring Error Analysis”. New York: Addison Wesley Longman Inc.
Langacker, Ronald W.1972. Fundamentals of Linguistic Analysis. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Murcia, Celce Marianne and Olshtain, Elite, 2000, “Discourse and Context in Language Teaching”, England: the Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
Murphy, Raymond, 1985, “English Grammar in Use”, England: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford Advanced Learners, 1989, Oxford: Oxford University Press
Richard, Jack, et al, 1985,”Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics” England: Longman Group Ltd.
Sumarlam, et al,. 2003. “Teori dan Praktik Analisis Wacana: Surakarta: Pustaka Cakra Surakarta.
Tallerman, Maggie,1998, ”Understanding Syntax” London: Oxford University Press
Ubol, Charas, 1981, “An Error Analysis of English Composition by Thai Students, Singapore: Seameo Regional Language Centre.
CURRICULUM VITAE
Indiyah Imran was born in Baturetno, August 8, 1932. She started Elementary School, then finished high School in 1938-1954. Standard Training Course, Yogyakarta, 1956. IKIP Malang English department, 1962. Post Graduate Studies for Indonesian Linguistics, Leiden University, Netherlands, 1973. Dissertation, “The Morphological Process of the Macassarese Word Classes” was in Hasanuddin University, Ujung Pandang, 1984. Inaugurated as professor of Descriptive Linguistics in IKIP Medan, 1985 Teaching Career. SGA Pamekasan-Madura, 1956-1958. IKIP Ujung Pandang 1962-1984. IKIP Medan 1984-1988. IKIP Bandung 1988-1998 (retired). Post Graduate Studies in Linguistics, Univ. Padjadjaran 1989-1998. University of Trisakti 1998-2001. Faculty of Letters S1 and S2 Gunadarma University. 2001-up to now.
Ni Luh Putu Setiarini was born in Sangsit, August 11, 1976. She started Elementary School in 1982 in Jakarta, then finished junior high school in 1991. In 1994 she finished high school and continued her diploma in Akademi Bahasa Asing “Yogyakarta” and continued her studies in 1998 in Gunadarma University. She has taught in Gunadarma since 2000. Now she is taking her graduate program majoring translation studies in the same university.
Ati Sumiati was born in Jakarta, September 18, 1977. She started Elementary School in 1984 and finished high school in 1990 in Jakarta. In 1996, she continued her undergraduate study in Faculty of Letters, Gunadarma University. She has taught in Gunadarma since 2000-up to now. She is also taking her graduate program majoring translation studies in the same university.