Translational Equivalence

A. Definition: 

Translational equivalence is the similarity between a word (or expression) in

one language and its translation in another. This similarity results from
overlapping ranges of reference.

A translation equivalent is a corresponding word or expression in another

language.

In translation, there are the source and target languages. Here, equivalence
involves an attempt to convert the content while retaining the context and meaning
of the original. Many view languages as having equivalent words, and that
translating from one to another simply involves finding a match. That cannot be
farther from the truth.

Keeping the spirit of the original text is paramount. A literal translation is

practically useless when the meaning behind the words is not upheld. Equivalence
only works when you have a deep understanding of what the source content is
trying to convey. It doesn’t simply cover the meaning of the content but the tone
and style of the delivery. This is something that machines simply cannot grasp,
thus culminating in a flat translation devoid of appeal. 

B. Real-Life Examples
In language, one word might have several different meanings. Take
the word “mobile,” which can mean phone, movement, or flexibility. To
maintain translational equivalence, it’s crucial to properly understand the
context of the word. In failing to do so, there will be a breakdown in
communication.

Imagine being on holiday in France, unable to understand the lovely

French language. You might be able to survive with a translation app on
your mobile phone. However, when a Parisian says, “Trop zarb, ton idée,”
and you proceed to find the English equivalent, what do you get? “Too zarb,
your idea.” Of course, only a local would be able to tell you that “zarb” is a
 play on words, more accurately a contraction of an inversion of the word
bizarre.

C. Translation Equivalence
Nida (1964) in her book Towards a Science of Translating argue that
there are two different types of equivalence, namely Formal Equivalence and
Dynamic Equivalence, which are :
a. Formal Equivalence
Nida (1964:159) states that formal equivalence focuses
attention on the message itself, in both form and content. In such a
translation one is concern with such correspondences as poetry to
poetry, sentence to sentence, and concept to concept. Formal
equivalence translation basically source-oriented; that is, it is
designed to reveal as much as possible of the form (e.g. syntax and
idiom) and content (e.g. themes and concept) of the original
message. In doing so, a formal equivalence attempts to reproduce
several formal elements, including grammatical unit, consistency
in word usage, and meanings in terms of the source context.

b. Dynamic Equivalence
Nida (1964:159) argued dynamic equivalence which is based
upon the principle of equivalence effect. In dynamic equivalent
translation the focus of attention is directed, not so much toward
the source message, as toward the receptor response. A dynamic
equivalent translation may be described as one concerning which a
bilingual and bicultural person can just justifiably say, “That is just
the way we would say it. One way of defining a dynamic
equivalent to the source-language describe it as “the closest natural
equivalent to the source-language message.” This type of
definition contains three essential items : (1) equivalent, which
points toward the source-language message, (2) natural, which
points toward the receptor language, and (3) closest, which binds
the two orientations together on the basis of the highes degree of
approximation.
 Ringkasan :

Ekuivalensi dapat dikatakan sebagai kesepadanan antara bahasa sumber dengan

bahasa target. Setiap ahli penerjemah memiliki konsepnya yang berbeda-beda.
Secara garis besar teori penerjemah tersebut terdiri dari 2 konsep yang saling
berkebalikan.