udThis research is focused on two main problems. First, what are the udstrategies used by the translator in translating the English personal pronouns from udBeauty and the Beast (BB) into Si Cantik dan Pangeran Buruk Rupa (CPBR). udSecond, this research wants to know about how the strategies influence the udtranslation quality in terms of accuracy and acceptability. udBased on the problems above, there are two purposes intended to be udachieved. The research aims to figure out what kind of strategies used by the udtranslator in translating the personal pronouns. Besides, it also aims to see the udeffect of the strategies used towards the translation quality in terms of accuracy udand acceptability. udDescriptive qualitative method is employed within this research. The data udcome from all English personal pronouns of BB and the Indonesian version in udCPBR. In analysing, the content analysis and questionnaires are used. In content udanalysis is employed to figure out the strategies while the questionnaires are used udto measure the Translation Quality Assessment (TQA). udFrom the analysis, some findings are gained. There are 154 data of English udpersonal pronouns which are translated into 129 Indonesian personal pronouns. udThese 154 data are classified into 16 types of English personal pronouns; the 129 udIndonesian are classified into 23 types. udThere are five (5) strategies employed by the translator. The strategies are: udfirst, translating the personal pronouns literally: 39 data (25.32%) are translated udinto free morpheme and 23 data (14.93%) are translated into enclitics. The second udstrategy is translating by structural adjustment: 37 data (24.02%) are translated udinto same function word and 11 data (7.14%) are translated into different function udword. The third strategy is translating into proper name: 15 data (9.74%). Fourth, udtranslating by deletion and addition: 25 (16.23%) are translated by deletion while udone datum (0.65%) is translated by addition. The last strategy is translating into udNoun, Demonstrative Reference and into Noun + Demonstrative Reference. There udis one datum (0.65%) which is translated into Noun, one datum (0.65%) which is udtranslated into Demonstrative Reference and 2 data (1.29%) which are translated udinto Noun + Demonstrative Reference. ud There are some problems related to the strategies used which affect the udTQA. In terms of accuracy, there are 8 data (33. 33%) deleted. Meanwhile, the udliteral translation strategy also brings problem on clarity in 37.5% (9 data) and udproblem on choice of words on 29.17% (7 data). These problems cause the mean udpoint on accuracy is 1.33. ud In acceptability, deletion is found as a problem on 3 data (14.29%). Literal udtranslation causes two problems on acceptability: problem on clarity (21. 81%) or ud5 data) and problem on addressing parents (6 data or 28.57%). These problems udmake the acceptability mean point reaches 1.09. ud In translating, there are various strategies employed by the translator. Yet, udthere are two strategies commonly used in translating, they are literal translation udstrategy and structural adjustment. In term of the quality of translation, a translator udshould attention on the deletion and choice of words for both may affect the udquality. udOne of the significances may be taken from this research is that personal udpronoun may be used as a means in teaching others, especially children, to respect udother persons.
展开▼
