Abstract
The notion of translatability is possibly done with the extent to which meaning can still be adequately conveyed across languages. For this to be feasible, meaning has to be understood not only in terms of what the source text contains, but also in terms of target audience and purpose of translation. In linguistic untranslatability, the functionally relevant features include some which are in fact formal features of the language of the source language text. If the target language has no formally corresponding feature, the text, or the item, is (relatively) untranslatable. What appears to be a quite different problem arises, however, when a situational feature, functionally relevant for the source text, is completely absent in the culture of target language. As culture has something to do with the concept, source language texts and items are more or less translatable rather than absolutely translatableoruntranslatable. An adaptation, then, is a procedure whereby the translator replaces a term with cultural connotations, where those connotations are restricted to readers of the original language text, with a term with corresponding cultural connotations that would be familiar to readers of the translated text. Translating such culturally untranslatable items entails profound knowledge on both source and target cultures. Most cases in this particular work are solved by keepingcultural terms in the source language text, with or without explanation. Ecological, social, and religious culture terms undergo the process most frequently.
Highlights
One of the ways of cross-cultural communication to be possible is through translation
Some examples are taken from Indonesian best seller novel LaskarPelangi (Hirata 2008), translated into English by Angie Kilbane under the title The Rainbow Troops. This particular work was first published in 2005, yet in this paper, I refer to the 23rd printed edition
This paper presents data from both works (Laskar Pelangi and The Rainbow Troops) and categorizes them according to Baker (2001) about unequivalence
Summary
Culture is a more general tendency rather than individual personality and it changes over time (Nida, 2001, p. 18-9) and is reflected by language (Hatim and Mason, 1989, p. 237). 94) defined culture as the way of life and its manifestations that are peculiar to a community that uses a particular language as its means of expression It includes objects, processes, institutions, customs, ideas peculiar to one group of people. The idea of cultural untranslatability is essential once the cultural distinction is excellent because, without having coping with this, translators cannot achieve 'naturalness' as well as express the actual source text's purpose. I'd like to go over below exactly what conditions a word is untranslatable, or even exactly what decides the actual event associated with cultural (un) translatability within the target culture This is essential because, for example, the culturally incongruous interpretation can be utilized being suitable inside an interpretation in which the audience allows this. We presuppose that we have a few problems associated with event associated with cultural untranslatability, as well as there is a determining element with regard to this kind of problems
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Celt: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching & Literature
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
