Amalia Safrina Indrawati. B0320006. Translation Analysis of Charactonyms in the Novel “The School for Good and Evil” by Soman Chainani. Bachelor’s degree Thesis: English Department Program, Faculty of Cultural Sciences, Universitas Sebelas Maret.

This study is aimed to analyse the translation of charactonym found in the novel “The School for Good and Evil” by Soman Chainani. This research is descriptive qualitative research and used two kinds of data sources. They are documents and informants. The documents are novel “The School for Good and Evil” and the translation. The informants of this research were raters and the researcher herself. First, the writer analysed the charactonym’s types with the categorization inspired by classification of meaningful names proposed by Yana (2016). Second, the translation techniques were analysed with the translation technique theory proposed by Molina & Albir (2002). Lastly, the translation quality was assessed with the translation quality assessment theory proposed by Nababan et al. (2012) in terms of accuracy and acceptability. The result of this study is aimed to answer the research questions of types, translation techniques, and translation quality. There are 87 total charactonyms found in “The School for Good and Evil” novel. Based on the analysis, there are ten types of charactonym, including five combinations of types, found in the novel. They are, in order from the most to the least, physical (34), title (25), psychological + physical (10), role + title (4), locality (4), role (3), psychological (3), title + locality (2), psychological + physical + occupation (1), and physical + title (1). There are fourteen translation techniques—including eight combinations of techniques employed—namely established equivalent (41), pure borrowing (19), established equivalent + pure borrowing (15), discursive creation (2), generalization (1), generalization + explicitation + established equivalent (1), amplification + pure borrowing (1), discursive creation + established equivalent (1), amplification + established equivalent + pure borrowing (1), established equivalent + naturalized borrowing (1), pure borrowing + discursive creation (1), established equivalent + explicitation (1), literal translation (1), and naturalized borrowing (1). Through this analysis, it can be concluded that the translation to those charactonyms is deemed accurate (81) because the messages of the names were delivered appropriately. It also deemed acceptable (78) because most of the data were complying to the rules of writing and they do not have strange word orders. On the other hand, some of the data are considered less accurate (3) and inaccurate (3) because some of the messages were not conveyed properly. Furthermore, a few data also considered less acceptable (8) and unacceptable (1) because they are not adhering to the Indonesian writing rules and have strange word order. Most of the accurate and acceptable translations were translated with Established Equivalent and Pure Borrowing, whereas, less accurate and less acceptable or inaccurate and unacceptable translations were translated with Discursive Creation.