Monday, April 8, 2019

Contoh Penerjemahan Sastra 2


Contoh Penerjemahan Sastra 2



Menerjemahakan karya sastra berbeda dengan menerjemahkan jenis teks lainnya. Hal ini dikarenakan dalam penerjemahan karya sasta penerjemah dituntut mampu mempertahankan keindahan bahasa atau nilai estetika yang terkandung dalam teks dimaksud. Dalam hal ini, nuansa yang timbul saat teks tersebut dibaca oleh pembaca TSu (teks sumber) sedapat mungkin dijaga dan dimunculkan kembali dalam versi terjemahannya, sehingga pembaca TSa (teks sasaran) dapat merasakan nuasa yang kurang lebih sama yang dirasakan oleh pembaca TSu. Berikut adalah contoh hasil penerjemahan sastra yang diambil dari novel John Steinbeck "The Grapes of Wrath", yang diterbitkan tahun 1939 dan dianugerahi Nobel Prize pada 1962.
TSu: 
Over the high coast mountains and over the valleys the grey clouds marched in from the ocean. The wind blew fiercely and silently, high in the air, and it swished in the bushes, and it roared in the forests. And then the wind stopped and left the clouds deep and solid. The rain began with gusty showers, pauses, and downpours; and then gradually it settled to a single tempo, small drops, and a steady beat, rain that was grey to see through, rain that cut midday light to evening. And at first the dry earth sucked the moisture down and blackened. For two days the earth drank the rain, until the earth was full. 


TSa: 

Di atas lembah dan pegunungan pesisir yang menjulang, awan kelabu berarak dari lautan. Angin berhembus kencang dalam kesunyian, tinggi di angkasa. Suaranya menggema di semak-semak dan jenggala. Kemudian menghilang begitu saja. Awanpun kian pekat. Turunlah hujan dengan lebatnya, berhenti, dan deras kembali. Perlahan-lahan suaranya membentuk suatu alunan, rintik-rintik, dan berirama. Hujan yang kelabu untuk ditembus mata. Hujan yang merampas rona siang menjadi malam. Bumi yang gersang mulanya hanya menyerap air dan menghitam. Hingga kenyanglah setelah dua hari mereguknya.

IELTS Writing Task 2 (Part 2)


IELTS Writing Task 2 (Part 2)





Some people think that not all criminals should be kept in prison. Some criminals should do unpaid work to help other people in the community. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?


Crimes make people feel worried about the security of themselves as well as their properties. As such, many think that the criminals caught should go in jail in order not to commit more crimes in the future. However, this idea sounds unfair to some due to the fact that not all crimes are really serious. Thus, they should be given a chance to be better people by doing unpaid work that can contribute to the society. In relation to this, I simply go for the later with the following reasons.


It is obvious that the government need much money to support the running of prisons. The money is used for a variety of purposes like maintaining the existing facilities, paying the officials in charge, and taking care of the prisoners. It means newcomers to jail will result in more budget allocated for caring about them. So allowing criminals with non-serious crimes to do unpaid work will apparently become a practical way to reduce the fund spent on jailing. And less serious crimes in this sense can include pickpocketing, recording sensitive videos without permission, and breaking one's inexpensive property.

Besides the aforementioned, doing this kind of job enables criminals to contact with the community and to give contribution to it directly. They will take advantage of interacting with those who might be able to help them out in solving their personal problems in better ways. Because people normally do bad things as a result of being unable to cope with difficulties properly. Subsequently, when trouble goes away from their life, they are most likely to come back to normal.

In fine, it sounds highly rational to let them work with no payment rather than to keep them in 'cages'.

IELTS Writing Task 2 (Part 1)


IELTS Writing Task 2 (Part 1)





Students in school and university learn far more from lessons with their teachers compared to other sources, such as television and the Internet. Do you agree or disagree?

Many people say that schools and universities are perfect places to study. The teachers provided by both institutions will assist students in pursuing knowledge and skills, which are required to achieve success in life. But to some others, technology has replaced the role of teachers in terms of becoming good sources for learning new things. And in relation to this, I personally go for the second due to the following reasons.

First of all, it is an undeniable fact that teachers, in any educational institutions, are limited by time when teaching. This condition will definitely lead students to self-learning in order to develop the knowledge they have gained from their teachers, or even to get the concept of a particular subject they have not known anything about. It is most likely to see that these teachers will then take the Internet as well as other media to explore the knowledge or the subject on question.

In addition to it, teachers also tend to give home assignments to students by choosing topics or problems that are off the explanation in class. They want to encourage the students to find out other neccessary sources relevant to what they have studied. It implies that they declair to be not the only source to look at if these learners wish to get more. In fact, there are much more sources out there than from the teachers themselves. They can browse the Internet, watch television, or come to a library to expand what is already in their mind. 
In conclusion, it is quite reasonable to say that students can learn far more from other sources than from their teachers in class.