quality of response towards questioning utterances … · in fawcett (in singgih: 2013) said that...

International Journal of Humanities, Religion and Social Science ISSN : 2548-5725 | Volume 2, Issue 8, 2018 www.doarj.org

1 www.doarj.org

QUALITY OF RESPONSE TOWARDS QUESTIONING

UTTERANCES FOUND IN THE NOVEL “ME BEFORE YOU”

AND ITS TRANSLATION

Ahmad Kirom1, M.R. Nababan

2, Djatmika

3

1,2,3Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta, Indonesia, Indonesia

Abstract: This research discusses the quality of response towards questioning utterances

found in the novel Me Before You and its translation. This aims to describe (1) the types of

questioning response utterances, (2) the translation quality of questioning response

utterances based on accuracy and acceptability aspects. This research is classified as a

descriptive qualitative research which focuses on a single case. The source data of this

research is the novel Me Before You and the Indonesian translation version. The data focuses

on questioning response utterances. The data are collected by using document analysis,

questionnaire and Focus Group Discussion. Furthermore, the data is analyzed by using the

domain, taxonomic, componential analysis and cultural theme with three rater. The result of

this research showed that the response pf questioning utterances based on Searle’s theory is

vary such as assertive, directive, commissive and expressive. Then, the response translation

of questioning utterances is considered as accurate and acceptable.

Keywords: Response, accuracy, acceptability, questioning utterances

I. INTRODUCTION

Many experts expressed their opinion regarding response, among them Subandi

(1982: 50) proposed a response with the term back “feedback” that has a great role in

determining whether a communication is good or not. With the response communicated from

the communicant to the communicator, misinterpretation will be avoided in a communication

process. Meanwhile, according to Poerdawarminta (1999: 43), response is defined as

reactions and answers. From the above two explanations, it can be concluded that response is

reaction to what is delivered by the communicant partner towards communicator so that the

communication can run smoothly.

Translation, as explained by Newmark (1988: 5) is "rendering the meaning of a text

into another language in the way that the author intended the text", ie translating the meaning

of a text into another language according to what is intended by the native speaker.

Quality of Response towards Questioning Utterances Found in the Novel “Me

Before You” And Its Translation

2 www.doarj.org

In line with the above idea, Nida and Taber (1982: 12) revealed that: "translating

consists of reproducing in the receptorlanguage the closest natural equivalence of the source

language message, first interms of meaning and secondly in terms of style." The definition of

Nida and Taber suggests that the style and meaning of Bsa should be commensurate with the

style and meaning of Bsu. It is quite clear from this last definition that translation is not only

correlated with diverting the message or meaning from Bsu to Bsa but also the style of the

language. This statement is supported by (Nababan, 2003: 20) who says that the style of

language in the context of translation needs to be considered by the translator.

Translation of a response utterance is not easy matter for a translator because there is

another purpose of an utterance that is not all explained in a dialogue. In line with this, Honig

in Fawcett (in Singgih: 2013) said that "However it is translated, the illocutionary force of

sentence would not change". Good translation is not only translating what is in a text but also

takes into account the context of the accompanying sentence. Regarded with the meaning

translated, sometimes a text in Bsu does not only have a literal or structural meaning, but

there is an intention contained in it. Reviewing a language like this is not a structural-kind of

study because structural review often results in a non-optimal study.

Example 1

Question: “Have you

been a carer for long?”

Response: “Um …

I’ve never actually

done it.”

Question: “Apakah anda sudah lama

menjadi perawat?”

Response: “Emm… Sebenarnya saya

belum pernah menjadi perawat.”

Example 2

Question: “What the

hell is she supposed to

do now?”

Response: “Well … she‟ll

just have to get another

job.”

Question: “Lalu. sekarang bagaimana?”

Response: “Yah…Lou kan bisa mencari

pekerjaan lain.”

In the above conversation, there are different ways of responding from the

communicant partner to the communicator. Furthermore, the researcher also examines the

quality of translated responses towards the above questioning utterances.

Among the related studies of illocution, there are still other types of illocution

emphasized, one of them is directive (Rahmat, 2012; Kuncara, 2013; Yuliana, 2015). In

addition, their research has not been much explored the type of assertive illocution, especially

on response towards questioning utterances.

In other studies related to illocution, other types of illocution both expressive and

directive is still be used by a group of people who have different culture and skills in using

some strategies (Mohsen, Jariah, 2012; Halimeh, Habib, Akbar, 2015; Sanaz, Fariba, 2014;



3 www.doarj.org

Omid, Zeinab, 2012). In addition, there is no relationship between pragmatic and translation

in the above study.

Lastly, an expressive illocution study has been discussed about translation techniques

and the quality used in translating response utterance among them (Nuraeni, 2008, Mansur,

2014, Fitriana, 2014). However, their study is still not focused on the response to n utterance.

Based on the results of the above review, researchers have the opportunity to continue

research on utterance acts, especially on the response towards questioning utterance. First,

researchers wanted to know about the type of response towards questioning utterance that

was classified based on Searle's theory. Secondly, researchers wanted to study about

translation quality of response towards the questioning utterance which seen from aspects of

accuracy and acceptability in novel Me Before You.

II. METHODS

This study is categorized as a qualitative descriptive study focusing on single case

only. The data source of this research is the novel Me Before You and its translation. The

data used is response towards questioning utterance. Data were collected by means of

document analysis, questionnaires and Focus Group Discussion. Furthermore, data were

analyzed by domain analysis, taxonomy, component and cultural theme involving three rater.

Assessment of the translation quality in this study was taken using instrument of

translation quality assessment presented by Nababan, et al. (2012). The following table

presents the level of accuracy and acceptability.

Table 1. Instrument of Accuracy Level Assessment

Translation

Category Scale Qualitative Parameter

Accurate 3

The meaning of a word, technical terms, phrase,

clause, sentence or text of the source language

which is accurately translated into the target

language; there is absolutely no distortion of

meaning.

Less Accurate 2

Most of the words meaning, technical terms,

phrases, clauses, sentences or source language text

are accurately translated into the target language.

However, there is still a distortion of meanings or

double meaning translations (taxa) or omitted

meanings that disturb the integrity of the message.

Inaccurate 1

The meaning of words, technical terms, phrases,

clauses, sentences or source language texts is

translated inaccurately into the target language or

omitted.



4 www.doarj.org

Table 2. Level of Acceptability

Translation

Category Scale Qualitatif Parameter

Acceptable 3

The translation feels natural; the technical used is

commonly used and familiar to the reader; the

phrases, clauses and sentences used are in line with

Indonesian principles.

Less

Acceptable 2

Generally, the translations are already natural; but

there is still little problem with the use of technical

terms or a few grammatical errors found.

Unacceptable 1

The translation is not natural or feels like a

translation work; the technical terms used are not

commonly used and are not familiar to the reader;

the phrases, clauses and sentences used are not in

accordance with Indonesian principles.

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Through a deep analysis, there are several types of responses towards questioning

utterance found in the novel Me Before You, where it is then classified according to the

Searle theory of utterance response. Researchers found four types of response towards

questioning utterance; i.e assertive, directive, commissive, and expressive. The most common

type of response found is assertive of 116 data (86,57%) from 134 research data. There were

13 data (09,70%) of directive response, commissive of 2 data (01,49%), and expressive of 3

data (02,23%) as written in the following table along with the explanation.

Table 3. Types of Response towards Questioning Utterance

Types of Response Utterance Total Data Percentage

Assertive 116 86,57 %

Directive 13 data 09,70 %

Commissive 2 data 01,49 %

Expressive 3 data 02,23 %

Total 134 100 %



5 www.doarj.org

a. Assertive

Assertive is a type of utterance response that expresses the communicator‟s trust

towards something, such as stating, reporting, mentioning, demonstrating, concluding,

describing, and affirming.

Example:

1) Kode : 001

BSU : “What‟s the problem?

“Legal hitch.‟

BSA : “Ada masalah apa?”

“Masalah legal”

2) Kode : 004 BSU : “Where‟s Mum?”

“Upstairs.”

BSA : “Mum dimana?”

“Di atas.”

The two examples of response above are a response from Will‟s friend, Patrick, and

Louisa‟s mother which is a form of reporting and showing. So, it is a form of assertive

illocusion.

b. Directive

Directive is an utterance response that expresses a communicator‟s intention. This

intention tends to ask other speakers to do something like telling, begging, demanding,

challenging, giving advice, and instructing.

Example:

1) Kode : 012

BSU : “Um … Have you ever considered joining the entertainment industry?‟

“What, as in pantomime dame?‟ BSA : “Emm… apa kau pernah menimbang-nimbang untuk bekerja di industri

hiburan?”

“Main teater, Maksudmu?” 2) Kode : 017

BSU : “I can‟t afford to buy a suit. What if I don‟t get the job?‟

“You can wear mine,…”

BSA : “aku tidak mampu beli setelan. Kalau aku tidak mendapatkan pekerjaan ini,

lalu gimana?”

“pakai punyaku saja,…”

The two examples of responses are responses from Louisa and her mother which is a

form of asking and suggesting. So it is a form of directive illocusion.



6 www.doarj.org

c. Commissive

Commissive is a kind of utterance response used by speakers to engage themselves

and make a commitment to an action in the future. Such actions include promising,

threatening, committing, and vowing.

Example:

Kode : 098

BSU:-)„You‟d get a tattoo?‟

„If it persuaded you,

BSA:-)“ kau mau membuat tato?”

“kalau dengan cara itu aku bisa membujukmu”

The above example is a response related to the future that is presupposition. Thus, it is a

form of commissive illocusion.

d. Expressive

Expressive is a type of utterance that states about the communicator‟s feeling.

Subcategories of expressive utterance can be praising, thanking, criticizing, complaining, and

apologizing.

Example :

1) Kode : 014

BSU : “Would your mum like a job?”

“Funny”

BSA : “Apakah ibumu butuh pekerjaan?”

“Lucu.” 2) Kode : 069

BSU : “Is there any way at all that we could get a table in here?”

“I‟m really sorry,‟ she said.” BSA : “ apakah tidak bisa diusahakan supaya kami bisa makan di sini?”

“saya benar-benar minta maaf.”

The two examples above are responses from Louisa and the waiter which takes form

of mocking and asking apologize. Thus, it is a form of expressive illocusion.

Translation quality of response towards questioning utterances found in the novel Me

before You

Quality of response towards the questioning utterance will be measured regarding its

accuracy and acceptability. It is said that an ideal translation is an accurately and acceptable

transferred message, according to the rules of the target language and understandable by the

target reader. The instrument together with its parameters have been mentioned in the above

method. In this study, researchers do this task with raters to assess the accuracy and

acceptability. While the technical assessment is conducted by giving a questionnaire on each

rater, then it is expected that they are able to give value in accordance with the above

mentioned parameters. The next process is FGD (Focused Group Discussion), i.e. rater and



7 www.doarj.org

researcher discuss to reach an agreement so that researchers can easily make a decision based

on the instruments and arguments of each rater.

Accuracy

In the accuracy assessment, there is a corresponding correlation between the source

language text and the target language. In other words, the source language text must be

accurately conveyed to the target language. To assess the accuracy of the translation results,

the method taken is to use the instrument of accuracy level with parameters that have been

described by Nababan, et al 2012.

Table 4. Percentage of the Accuracy Level

Accuracy Level Total Percentage

Accurate 132 98,50%

Less Accurate 1 00,74%

Inaccurate 1 00,74%

Total 134 100%

Based on the table above, it can be seen that most of response in words, phrases, and

sentences towards the questioning utterance in the novel Me Before You is an accurate

translation with percentage of 98.50% or 132 data. Some of the results are less accurate

translation, i.e. 1 data or 00.74% and 1 data or 00.74% is inaccurate. Thus, it can be

concluded that research on response towards the questioning utterance in the novel Me Before

You is a translation that tends to be accurate with an indication of high accuracy quality

assessment. Some examples of the accurate translations can be seen in the following

example:

Kode :114

BSU : -) “What – what are you doing there?‟

„„Ssh. Don‟t raise your voice”

BSA : -) “Kalian… sedang apa di situ?”

“ssst. Pelankan suaramu.

Kode :078

BSU : -) „„What does that mean?‟

“If you‟d bothered to ask me, Clark.‟

BSA: -) “apa maksudnya?”

“Andai kau mau bertanya dulu padaku, Clark.”

From the above two examples, the translated message from the source language is

accurately transfered into the target language. It is proved by the absence of distorted

meanings in the target language.

Examples of Inaccurate Translation:



8 www.doarj.org

Kode: (080)

BSu : „Are those short stories?

I can‟t believe you noticed that.‟ BSa : “Apakah kumpulan cerpen itu?”

“mau bagaimana lagi.”

From the above example the message translation in the source language is

inaccurately transfered into the target language. It is evidenced by the existence of distorted

meanings in the target language and messages conveyed to the source language are not fully

contextual.

Acceptability

This component is related to notwhether the translation results have been stated

according to the rules, norms, and culture of BSa or not, both in the micro and macro level

(Nababan, 2010). If the accuracy focuses on the message delivered, the acceptability focuses

more on the fairness of a translation.

Based on assessment on the acceptability of the translation of 134 data, there is 129

data or 96.26% categorized into acceptable translation, 4 data or as much as 02.98%

categorized into less acceptable translation, and 1 data or 00.74% classified into unacceptable

translation. Thus it can be concluded that the quality of acceptable response translation

towards the questioning utterance can be categozed as acceptable of 96.26%. More detail

information can be seen in the following table:

Table 5. Percentage of The Acceptability Level

Acceptability Level Total Percentage

Acceptable 129 96,26%

Less Acceptable 4 02,98%

Unacceptable 1 00,74%

Total 134 100%

Examples of Acceptable Translation:

1. Kode : 006

BSU : -) „Are you going somewhere?‟

-)„No.‟

BSA : -) “Apa kamu mau pergi?”

-)“Tidak.” 2. Kode : 104

BSU : -) “What was the best place you‟ve ever visited?‟

“„In terms of what?

BSA : -) “Tempat mana yang paling asyik yang pernah kau kunjungi?”

““Paling asyik berdasarkan apa?



9 www.doarj.org

From the above two examples, the translated message from the source language is

acceptably transfered to the target language. It is evidenced that the response utterance is

familiar to the readers and the rules used are in accordance with the rules of the Indonesian

language.

Examples of Less Acceptable and Unacceptable Translations

1. Kode Data: „002

BSu : That you, love?

„Yup.‟

BSa : “Kaukah itu, love?”

“Yup”

2. BSu : „Are you and Pat having some problems?‟

„Mum, I –‟ BSa : “Apa kau sedang ada masalah dengan Pat?”

“Mum, aku…”

From the above two examples, the translated message from the source language is less

acceptably or unacceptably transfered to the target language It is evidenced that the response

utterance seems not familiar to the readers and the rules used are not in accordance with the

principles of the Indonesian language.

The results of this study are in accordance with the theory stated by Searle (in Yule,

1996) which classifies utterance into 5 types i.e. 1) assertive 2) directive 3) commissive 4)

expressive and 5) declarative. There are only 4 types of response towards the questioning

utterance stated i.e. assertive, directive, commissive and expressive. While declarative is not

found in this study. The dominant utterance found in this research is assertive. This is in

accordance with what has been investigated by Rahmadwisudawanto who found four types of

utterance. However, what makes this research different from the prvious research is previous

researchers use comic as its object and they only analyze one character only. Thus, it is

possible that there are other types of new utterance in other characters. While in this esearch,

researchers analyzed every character in the novel. Researchers get a strong assumption after

doing his research that there are four types of response towatds the questioning utterance

found in the novel Me Before You, i.e. assertive, directive, commissive and expressive.

Based on rater‟s assessment, the translated response towards the questioning utterance

tends to be accurate and acceptable. For the assessment given by the rater, researchers can

conclude that from 134 findings, the translation has a high level of accuracy. The translator is

also trying to stress the message and style used by the original author without leaving the

important elements of the novel study Me Before You.

IV. CONCLUSION

Based on the results and discussion of the research related to the type of response

towards the questioning utterance and its translation quality in the novel Me Before You, the

researcher can underline some final conclusions as follows:



10 www.doarj.org

From analysis result of 134 data, there are four types of response towards the

questioning utterance: assertive, directive, commissive and expressive. Response utterances

which dominant is assertive.

The quality of response uttered towards the questioning utterance from the aspect of

accuracy and acceptability is in good quality. It is evidenced that there are only 2 from 134

data which categorized into less accurate and inaccurate. Furthermore, based on the

acceptability aspect, there are only 5 from 134 data which is less acceptable and

unacceptable.

From the the total data collected, it can be concluded that only assertive illocution

which is considered as inaccurate and unacceptable. Thus, the next researcher or novel

translator must be careful in translating response utterance towards the questioning utterance

of assertive illocusion type.

REFERENCES

Austin. J.L. 1962. How to Do Things with words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Baker. M. 2001. Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York:

Routledge.

Basnett - McGuire. 1991. Translation studies. New York: Metheun & Co.Ltd.

Bell, R. T. 1991. Translation and Translating: Theory and Practice. London and New York:

Longman.

Bungin, H. M Burhan.2007. SosiologiKomunikasi. Kencana, Jakarta

Catford. 1965. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Chen, Sheng-Jie. 2004. Linguistic Dimensions of Subtitling. Perspective from

Taiwan. Meta Journal, XLIX, 1, 2004.

Fitriana, Irta. 2014. Analisis Teknik dan Kualitas Terjemahan Tindak Tutur Ekspresif Dalam

Novel Stealing Home (Hati Yang Terenggut) Karya Sherryl Woods. Thesis of. Sebelas

Maret University, Surakarta.

Ghanbaria, Halimeh, Gowharya, Habib, Azizifar, Akbar. 2015. Investigating Apology

Strategy among Kurdish Bilinguals: A Case Study in Ilam. Elsevier Ltd. Procedia -

Social and Behavioral Sciences 204 – 210. Science Direct

House. J. 2015. Translation Quality Assessment. New York. Routledge.

Kridalaksana, Harimurti. (1984). Kamus Linguistik. Jakarta: Gramedia.

Kuncara, Singgih D. 2013. Analisis Terjemahan Tindak Tutur Direktif Pada Novel The

Godfather dan Tejemahannya Dalam Bahasa Indonesia. Thesis. Sebelas Maret

University, Surakarta.

Larson. 1998. Meaning-Based Translation. University Press of America

Leech, Geoffry. 1993. Prinsip-prinsip pragmatik (diterjemahkan oleh Oka). Jakarta. Balai

Pustaka.

Levinson, Stephen C.1983. Pragmatics. London: Cambridge University Press.



11 www.doarj.org

Longman Dictionary. 2009. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. Edinburgh.

Pearson Education Limited.

Machali. 2000. Pedoman bagi Penerjemah. Jakarta: PT Grasindo

Mahmood, K. Rauf. 2014. A Pragmatic Analysis of Yes/No Questions in Englishrequest

speech ACT strategies. Elsevier Ltd. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46

(2012 ) 678 – 685.Science Direct.

Mansur, Aminullah Angga. 2014. Kualitas Terjemahan Bentuk Mitigasi Pada Tindak Tutur

Memerintah (Commanding) Dalam Dua Seri Novel Harry Potter. Thesis. Sebelas


Shahrokhi, Mohsen. 2012. The Realization of Apology Strategies among Persian Males.

Procedia - social and behavioral sciences 692 – 700. Science Direct.

Moleong. L. J. 2005. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.

Molina. L & Albir. A.H. 2002. Translation Technique Revisited: A Dynamic and

Functionalist Approach. University de Autonama de Barcelona, Barcelona Spain: Meta

Jurnal XLVII

Nababan, M. R. (2003). Aspek Teori Penerjemahan dan Pengalihbahasaan. Yogyakarta:

Pustaka Pelajar.

Nababan, M.R. (2008). Kompetensi Penerjemahan Dan Dampaknya Pada Kualitas

Terjemahan. Sidang senat terbuka. Pidato Pengukuhan Guru Besar Penerjemahan.

Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta.

Nababan, M. R. (2010). Pengembangan Model Penilaian Kualitas Terjemahan. Summary of

UNIKOM Study, 2nd

Year of 2010. Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta

Nababan M. R., Nuraeni & Sumardiono. 2012. Pengembangan Model Penilaian Kualitas

Terjemahan. Linguistic and Literature Study, Vol. 24, No. 1, June 2012: 39-57

Nababan, P.W.J. 1987. Ilmu Pragmatik (Teori dan Penerapannya). Jakarta: Project

Development of Educative Personnel Institute.

Nasir, M. 1999. Metode Penelitian. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia.

Newmark. 1988. A Textbook of Translation. Singapore: Prentice Hall

Nuraeni, Ardianna. 2008. Perbandingan Terjemahan “Tindak Tutur Mengeluh” dalam Film.

Bad Boys II yang ditayangkan di Stasiun Televisi dan VCD. Thesis. Sebelas Maret

University, Surakarta

Tabatabaeia, Omid ,Samiee, Zeinab. 2012. Transfer of requestive speech act from L1 to L2 in

Iranian EFL learners. Elsevier Ltd. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 70 (

2013 ) 239 – 244.Science Direct.

Patton, Michael Quinn. 1980. Qualitative Evaluation Methods. London: SAGE.

Poerdawarminta. 1999. Psikologi Komunikasi. Jakarta. UT.

Rastegara, Sanaz, Yasami, Fariba. 2014. Iranian EFL Learners' Proficiency Levels and Their

Use ofApology Strategies. Elsevier Ltd. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 1535

– 1540.Reference to Press Conferences. Elsevier Ltd. Procedia - Social and Behavioral

Sciences 136 (2014 ) 36 – 40.



12 www.doarj.org

Santosa R. 2014. Draf Buku: Metode Penelitihan Kualitatif Kebahasaan. UNS

Searle.J. R. 1969. Speech Acts An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge.

Cambridge University Press.

Soejono dan Abdurrahman. 1999. Metode Penelitian: Suatu Pemikiran dan Penerapan.

Jakarta: RinekaCipta.

Subandi A. 1982. Psikologi Sosisal. Jakarta. Bulan Bintang

Suryawinata.Z &Herianto. S. 2003. Translation: Bahasan Teori dan Penuntun Praktis

Menerjemahkan. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.

Sutopo.H.B. 2002. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif: Dasar Teori dan Terapannya dalam

Penelitian. Surakarta: UNS Press.

Wisudawanto Rahmat. 2012. Analisis Terjemahan Tuturan Karakter Spongebob Dalam

Komik Amazing Journey dan Terjemahannya Dalam Bahasa Indonesia. Thesis. Sebelas


Yasamia, Fariba, Rastegarb, Sanaz. 2014. The Use of Thanking Strategies among Iranian

EFL Learners of Different Proficiency Levels. Elsevier Ltd. Procedia - Social and

Behavioral Sciences 98 ( 2014 ) 1926 – 1930. Science Direct

Yule. G. 1996. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Yuliana, R. 2015. Analisis Tidak Tutur Direktif Dalam Dora The Explorer: Super Babies’

Dream Adventure dalam terjemahannya Petualangan Mimpi Bayi Super. “Seminar

prasastiII” Pragmatic Study in Every Aspects.

Yusefia, Kolsoum, G. Habib , Akbar, dkk . 2015. A pragmatic Analysis of Thanking

Strategies among Kurdish Speakers of Ilam based on gender and age. Elsevier Ltd.

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 199 ( 2015 ) 211 – 217. Science Direc

quality of response towards questioning utterances … · in fawcett (in singgih: 2013) said that...

Documents