|Penulis Utama||:||Narrendri Jati Putri|
|NIM / NIP||:||C0309044|
|Judul||:||A Comparison Of Translation Techniques And Quality Between The Translation Of Summary Of Chapter Fifteen Of A Book Entitled Advertising Communication And Promotion Management Undertaken By Transtool And Human Translator|
|Imprint||:||Surakarta - F. SSR - 2014|
|Sumber||:||UNS-F. SSR Prog. D III Sastra Inggris-C.0309044 -2014|
|Jenis Dokumen||:||Laporan Tugas Akhir (D III)|
|Abstrak||:||The research focuses on the comparison of techniques and quality of translations of the summary of chapter fifteen of a book entitled Advertising Communication and Promotion Management undertaken by Transtool and human translator. The purposes of this study are to find out the translation techniques and quality of the translations produced by Transtool and a student of English Department. The research employs a descriptive-qualitative method. The data were collected by employing a purposive sampling technique. The research was conducted by using content analysis and questionnaire. In the content analysis, the researcher collected the data from the summary of chapter fifteen of “Advertising Communication and Promotion Management” produced by Transtool and the student. The total data were 44 data. This research used a close and open-ended questionnaire that was contributed to the raters. The result of the data analysis shows that: 1) In terms of Transtool translation, there are 7 techniques used, i.e. literal translation; amplification; modulation; transposition; calque; borrowing; and linguistic amplification. While in terms the student translation,there are 9 techniques, i.e. literal translation; borrowing; amplification; transposition; linguistic amplification; calque; modulation, established equivalence, and reduction. 2) The result in terms of accuracy, Transtool produced 0% accurate translation, 3 (13,64%) less accurate, and 19 (86,36%) inaccurate translation. While the student produce 10 (45,45%) accurate translation, 9 (40,91%) less accurate translation, and 3 (13,64%) inaccurate translation. Meanwhile, relating to the acceptability, Transtool produces 1 (4,55%) less acceptable translation, and 21 (95,45%) unacceptable translation. While the student produces 3 (13,63%) acceptable translation, 18 (81,81%) less acceptable translation, and 1 (4,54%) unacceptable translation. In terms of redability, Transtool produces(18,18%) less readable translation, and 18 (81,82%) not readable translation. While the student produces 12 (54,54%) readable translation, 8 (36,37%) less readable translation, and 2 (9,09%) not readable translation. It can be concluded that the translation techniques affect the translation quality. It is also found that Transtool’s users should edit the Transtool translation before using it.|
|File Dokumen Tugas Akhir||:||
Harus menjadi member dan login terlebih dahulu untuk bisa download.
|File Dokumen Karya Dosen||:||-|
1. Drs. Agus Hari Wibowo, M.A., Ph.D.
|Fakultas||:||Fak. Sastra dan Seni Rupa|