The Translation of Subject Pronoun I from English into Balinese in the Novel The Little Prince and Raja Cenik
on
e-Journal of Linguistics
Available online at https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol/index
Vol. 17, No. 1, January 2023, pages: 08-18
Print ISSN: 2541-5514 Online ISSN: 2442-7586
https://doi.org/10.24843/e-jl.2023.v17.i01.p02
The Translation of Subject Pronoun I from English into Balinese in the Novel The Little Prince and Raja Cenik
Ni Made Ariani
Denpasar, Bali, Indonesia, Email: [email protected]
Article info
Received Date: 5 April 2022
Accepted Date:11 April 2022
Published Date:31 January 2023
Keywords: Subject Pronoun, Translation, Culture, English, Balinese
Abstract
Balinese language has various varieties for its subject pronoun I. Investigating whether the translator presents these varieties when translating the English subject pronoun I into Balinese using the novel The Little Prince and its Balinese translation Raja Cenik is the focus of this study. As the finding, the translator utilizes three different lexicons in translating the English subject pronoun I into Balinese. These varieties include Icang, Titiang and Gelah. The utilization of these three lexicons depends on the social status of the speakers and the interlocutors. Balinese language possesses a number of different linguistic registers. Each of the register addresses the social status of the speakers and the interlocutors. The finding of this study shows that culture and language are intricately interwoven to each other in the translation process.
Cultural content can always be found in specific language items. A language is a part of a culture and a culture is a part of a language; the two are intricately interwoven so that one cannot separate the two without losing the significance of either language or culture (Brown, 1994:165). This concept resonates perfectly with Balinese language and its culture. Balinese language appears to be the epitome of its people, their historical and cultural backgrounds plus the approach they take on to live their lives. Take, for instance, Balinese language has varied registers for their native speakers to utilize in accordance with their interlocutors’ castes or social status in the society. There are four different castes in Bali, which include Brahmana, Ksatria, Waisya and Sudra. The caste of Brahmana includes a group of clergies who perpetuates their lives to carry out spiritual duties in the community. The second caste of Ksatria includes a group of leaders who perpetuates their lives to serve the government, such as warriors, nobilities and royals. The third caste of Waisya includes a group of people who involves in the trading industry. In the past, they worked as merchants for various types of commodities to support the economy. Meanwhile the last caste of Sudra includes a group of people who worked as farmers or laborers. This caste is also known as the caste for commoners in the ancient time. The communication activity very much depends on the castes or the social status, which bind the speakers and the interlocutors. This tradition is not merely about a polite etiquette, but it also shows a concept of affirmation toward the higher castes. This affirmation articulates a sense of gratefulness or appreciation from people with lower castes for the roles, responsibility and contribution those with higher castes did. There is a philosophical value behind of the existence of these castes.
These four castes are the cultural content, meanwhile different linguistic registers are one of the distinctive items in Balinese language. There is an intricacy exists within these two areas, culture and language. Translating this intricacy into another language then appears to be the background of this study. Balinese language has various varieties for its subject pronoun I, which is the focus discussion of this study. Investigating whether the translator presents these varieties when translating the English subject pronoun I into Balinese is the formulated problem of this study. An attempt to explore the possibility in translating a culture is the goal of this study. The result of the analysis is expected to contribute in providing an insightful perspective in translating cultural content without ‘sacrificing’ the linguistic scope of the discussed issue.
There are a number of previous studies, which take the topic on linguistic registers in Balinese. Reviewing these studies is part of the process in understanding the availability to delve more into this topic discussion. Moreover, this is also to investigate various innovative strategies to translate these linguistic registers from Balinese into different languages or vice versa. Investigating the decision in representing the cultural content into the Target Language (TL) or otherwise sticking with the syntactical rule of the Source Language (SL) is the focus in reviewing these previous studies, which serves to be the enrichment for this present study. Savitri & Dewi (2019) analyzed the process in translating words or phrases, which contain speech levels in Balinese into Indonesian and English. They concludes that the Balinese speech levels cannot be easily translated into Indonesian and English. Their conclusion motivates this present study to explore more using different perspective to understand the challenges in articulating the concept of speech levels or registers in Balinese language. Meanwhile, one of the most important highlights observed from Sutika (2019) is the fact that Balinese language conveys a sense of modesty, courtesy, and manners. This present study is to utilize these three important points as key references and observe if they are also conveyed by the SL in the present study. The existence or the absence of these three values in the SL is further analyzed in order to understand how significant they influence the translation product. Andini, Riana & Dhanawaty (2019) analyzes the utilization of Balinese registers in short stories. They find that there are five different registers utilized, which include Alus Singgih, Alus Sor, Alus Madia, Alus Mider and Basa Andap. Their finding can be another important reference for this present study to utilize in analyzing the types of registers in the present study’s TL. The similarity these three previous studies share is the various registers in Balinese language as their topic discussion, meanwhile the differences can be observed from their analytical units. This present study also takes different registers exist in Balinese language; however, its analytical unit is completely different, which is focused on the translation of subject pronoun ‘I’ from English into Balinese.
The approach of this study is Descriptive Translation Studies (Holmes in Toury, 1995), meanwhile examining the translation product becomes the primary orientation of this approach. In the light of these points, this study is qualitative in nature as the entire analytical process is drawn from a constructivist / interpretivist perspective (Creswell, 2009). The data was taken from two translated novels. The SL is in English entitled The Little Prince. Meanwhile the TL is in Balinese entitled Raja Cenik. These two novels are translated from its original version, which is in French - Le Petit Prince. This beloved classic is composed by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry. This timeless tale does not only touch upon imagination but also offers life lessons immensely. The data was analyzed based on subjective interpretations. The results of the analysis in the study were presented by combining the formal method with the informal method (Sudaryanto, 2015).
This section sheds light on the varied translations of subject pronoun I from English into Balinese. These varieties can ultimately be a clue in determining whether culture can be translated from one language to another language with their distinctive characteristics. As the initial finding, the translator seems to use three different lexicons in translating the subject pronoun ‘I’ from English into Balinese. These varieties include Icang, Titiang and Gelah. These three lexicons indicate the first person singular subject pronoun. There are six representative data presented in order to elaborate a number of factors, which might influence the translator’s decision in rendering the subject pronoun ‘I’ into different lexicons in Balinese.
Data (3 - 1)
SL : Once when I was six years old I saw a magnificent picture in a (1995:7)
book…
TL : Dugas Icang enu cenik matuwuh enem tiban, Icang taén (2019:9)
nepuk gambar ané karure luwung di buku…
The first variation the translator opts in translating the subject pronoun I is Icang. In accordance to the linguistic registers in Balinese, this lexicon is categorized as part of the Basa Sor category, specifically the sub category of Basa Kasamen / Kapara. Tinggen (1986) explains that Balinese language possesses a number of linguistic registers. These registers are known as Sor Singgih Basa Bali. There are many different ways to categorize these registers. One of them is by dividing the registers into three different categories, which include Basa Sor, Basa Madia and Basa Singgih. Each of these three categories can still be further divided into a number of sub categories. These divisions are always in line with the existence of those four different castes in Bali. Data (3 – 1) is said by the narrator of the story in the Little Prince novel. The narrator provides the readers with his throwback memories from his past. The translator may want to show the narrator’s attempt to build a closer bounding connection with the readers. One of the core concepts of Basa Kasamen / Kapara is the familiarity the speakers and the interlocutors share. The use of Icang in this context does not convey an indication to disrespect the interlocutors’ castes. It does not convey an indication to elevate someone’s position or domination in the communication process either. Data (3 – 1) is found in the beginning of the novel. This seems to show the strategy the translator utilizes in setting the tone or the flow of the narration. Building the familiarity between the narrator and the readers can be regarded as one of the most importance factors influencing the translator’s decision in using this lexicon.
Data (3 - 2)
SL : “Nothing. I own them.” (1995:89)
TL : “Sing kénkén. Nak Icang ané ngelahang.” (2019:81)
The sense of familiarity can also be identified on Data (3 - 2). This utterance is the response from the businessman to Little Prince’s question. Tinggen (1986) highlights that Basa Kasamen / Kapara can be used by both parties; the speaker and the interlocutor in the communication process. The businessman does not seem to elevate the Little Prince’s caste nor does he attempt to elevate his own. In fact, he creates an impression that these both characters have a good companionship or in Balinese, it is known as the term Pasawitran. Setting a strict boundary seems to be absent from this context situation. These two data prove that the translator does not only render the closest equivalent of the message, but also manages to present the cultural value, which binds the language of the TL.
Data (3 - 3)
|
SL |
: “That is so. And if you are good I will give you a string, too, so that you can tie him during the day, and a post to tie him (1995:23-24) to” |
|
TL |
: “Inggih rarisang. Yéning Ida arsa, jagi aturin titiang tali anggén negul I domba wantah ring rainanné. Naler jagi aturin (2019:24) patokné.” |
The narrator of the story says this utterance to the Little Prince, who is the main character in the novel. The narrator is engaged in a conversation with the Little Prince and eventually learning about the background and the social status of his interlocutor. The translator seems to translate the subject pronoun I into Titiang based upon the perspective the narrator has toward the Little Prince. In addition, the translator might have built an association between Balinese castes and the social status of these two characters. In Balinese culture, a prince is categorized as Ksatria. The caste of Ksatria includes a group of leaders who perpetuates their lives to serve the government, such as warriors, nobilities and royals. Therefore, it can be summed up that the context situation in this conversation is the communication between the narrator, who is described as a pilot and the Little Prince, who is obviously a royal. When this context situation is associated with Balinese castes, it can be identified that there are two different castes engaged in the communication activity. Since there is no further explanation regarding the social status of the narrator, besides the fact that he is described as a pilot whose plane happens to be falling down from the sky, it might be safe to say that his social status is lower than the Little Prince’s. To begin with, there are two castes lower than the caste of Ksatria, which are the castes of Waisya and Sudra. Identifying the type of occupation the narrator has, which is a pilot and has minimum connection with the essence Waisya (trading or business), therefore his social status can simply be assumed as a Sudra.
This Data (3 – 3) shows that the translator does not merely find the closest equivalence for the subject pronoun I in Balinese, but she also identifies the social status between these two characters beforehand. This identification process can be an indication that the translator also renders the cultural value into the translation product. Utilizing the inappropriate translation for I into Balinese will create an awkwardness that the native speakers would feel about the translation. Moreover, the tone of the conversation would also sound rude since a Sudra is expected to utilize proper word choices in addressing their interlocutors with higher castes. This might have been one of the possible factors influencing the translator’s decision in translating I into Titiang. The word Titiang is the literal translation for the subject pronoun I. This lexicon is identified as part of the Basa Singgih category, specifically the sub category of Basa Alus Sor. This sub category is utilized in order to humble oneself when speaking with people of higher status or people who are worthy of respect. The utilization of Titiang as the translation of I indicates that the narrator attempts to humble himself when having a conversation with a prince. Even though the SL does not indicate the utilization of different tones or registers in communicating the subject pronoun I, but the translator presents this different register in the translation product. The Data (3 – 3) also proves the translator tends to put the emphasis on the TL instead of the SL. The translator translates something, which is not addressed in the SL. Presenting this unaddressed points into the TL seems to be a logical step to do in order to set the appropriate tone of the communication and provide the naturalness in the translation product. Producing a satisfactory translation product therefore can be realistically achieved by prioritizing the TL without changing or interfering the original message conveyed by the SL.
This Data (3 – 4) below also shows a similar indication of the speaker humbling herself when speaking with someone of higher status or someone who is worthy of respect. The following utterance is said by a flower to the Little Prince.
Data (3 - 4)
SL
TL
“Ah! I am scarcely awake. I beg that you will excuse me. My petals are still all disarranged ...”
(1995:56)
(2019:51)
“Ah, titiang wau kedat. Nunas ampura, bok titiangé kantun samben… ”
The translator seems to do the same initial process before selecting the appropriate lexicon in translating the subject pronoun I, similar to the previous Data (3 – 3). Identifying the social castes between the characters involved is the initial process, which seems to help the translator in accelerating the natural tone of the translation product. The Little Prince is very much moved and amazed to look at this beautiful flower, which is about to bloom. The Little Prince is not able to restrain his admiration to this flower. In spite of her beauty, the flower repeatedly attempts to humble herself. Firstly, she says that she has just woken up, which is in contrast with the full radiance of her beauty. Secondly, she says that her petals are still all disarranged, which the Little Prince seems to have trouble understanding it. As mentioned on Data (3 – 3), the core concept of the Basa Singgih - Basa Alus Sor is to help appropriately positioning ourselves in the communication process. When oneself is fully aware about the social status of his or her interlocutors, the speakers are expected to set the appropriate tone. Setting this tone can cover from the utilization of the appropriate lexicons for our interlocutors to the utilization of the lexicons for our own selves. Considering the fact that the flower and the Little Prince obviously possess different social status, therefore the tone must be adjusted accordingly. As a prince, the main character has a higher social status than the flower. Besides his royal title as one of the earliest indications in identifying the superiority of his social status, the responsibility he is in charge of toward the flower also seems to be another factor in identifying his higher status. In the story, the Little Prince is described to look for a sprinkling can of fresh water in order to tend the flower. This action shows that the Little Prince has an important responsibility for the flower. Whereas, the flower pretty much depends on the Little Prince.
The different social status these two characters have and the responsibility one possesses over another can then be identified as two significant factors causing the translator to choose the lexicon Titiang as the translation for the subject pronoun I that the character of flower uses. Besides these two factors, the decision in using this lexicon also seems to help the flower’s attempt in humbling herself toward the Little Prince. The translator might not want to make the flower sound over confident by easily accepting the Little Prince’s compliment. Secondly, by using this lexicon Titiang, the translator might want help the flower to affirm that her interlocutor does not only have a higher social status but also more power over her. Using the lexicon Titiang for this context situation seems to address these goals. The translator renders the subject pronoun I into Titiang, which is the category of the Basa Singgih,and Basa Alus Sor sub-category specifically to not only translate the surface structure from the intended message but also the deep structure, which is the concealed intention one of the characters has. This Data (3 – 4) shows that different registers in Balinese can be used to implicitly convey our meaning and intention without really saying it explicitly. The translator clearly presents the culture of the TL in the translation product, which is actually not addressed in the SL. The action of presenting this cultural value actually makes the translation product closer to the TL audiences, since they are familiar with this cultural value and in need to have it to help them understand the context situation binds the story.
The third variation of the subject pronoun I in Balinese is Gelah. The Little Prince says this following Data (3 – 5) to the narrator of the story. Unlike the other four previous data, which utilizes the lexicons Icang and Titiang, the translator opts for Gelah this time.
Data (3 - 5)
SL : “I am very fond of sunsets…” (1995:43)
TL : “Gelah demen gati mabalih disurup matan ainé…” (2019:41)
Gelah is the literal translation for the subject pronoun I. This lexicon is in the category of Basa Andap. This category provides a rather neutral nuance in the communication activity. Basa Andap is neither rude nor polite. Therefore, this category is normally utilized by people from the same caste and the same years of birth. In addition, Basa Andap is also chosen by the speakers with higher castes to communicate with their interlocutors from lower castes. This concept can be observed from (Suwija, dkk, 2018:15) as follow “Kata-kata Andap tersebut setelah membentuk kalimat, bisa dipakai berbicara oleh Sang Singgih (golongan terhormat) terhadap Sang Sor (golongan penghormat).” This quote explains that words in Basa Andap category after forming a sentence, can be used by the Singgih (the speakers with higher castes who are being respected by their interlocutors) to speak to the Sor (the interlocutors with lower castes who respect their speakers). This concept highlights a clear boundary, which the speakers and the interlocutors possess with their respective roles they play and contribute in the communication activity.
The Little Prince opts the lexicon Gelah to address himself when he communicates with the narrator. This lexicon affirms the main character’s social status as a prince without really belittling the narrator. Using this lexicon in fact seems to position the Little Prince with a good grace in the entire communication process. For this context situation, this lexicon can also be observed providing a sense of comfort as it prevents the interlocutors from the feeling of being intimidated. Suppose the Little Prince utilized the variation of Icang like Data (3 – 1) and (3 – 2), the narrator would have probably felt terrified. Often times, when people with higher status opts for this lexicon Icang when communicating with their interlocutors with lower castes, it can be an indication of anger or disappointment. The given context situation, which binds the communication certainly plays a vital importance in providing a clue or two to the interlocutors in giving the appropriate response or further feedback. Likewise, the initial way the speakers set the tone will always be crucial, too in allowing everyone involved in the communication activity to contribute. Getting a simple message across from one to another requires an adequate understanding to varied aspects. These aspects certainly do not only cover the linguistic aspect, but also the cultural and the ability to understand the tone used by people we communicate with. The initial tone the Little Prince sets also provides some kind of concealed information on how this main speaker wishes his interlocutor to respond him. This action proves that choosing the appropriate translation for the subject pronouns In Balinese, especially I is very important to do.
The translator seems to respond the urgency in setting the boundary between the Little Prince and the narrator well. The variations a subject pronoun has in Balinese clearly does not only help people to understand the intended message, but they are also capable of guiding them to identify the background of the speakers. Data (3 – 5) proves that translating always requires a deep analysis both linguistically and culturally. These two aspects need to be analyzed from both the SL and the TL. The SL can be initially used to help the translator navigate on where and what the target of the translation will have to be. Likewise, the TL culture also needs to be perfectly understood in order to accelerate the meaning and make sure the translation product can be accepted, understood and read well by the TL audiences.
This following Data (3 – 6) is between a King and the Little Prince. The Little Prince finds himself in the neighborhood of the asteroids 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, and 330. As the Little Prince has never been in these planets before, it is no wonder that the King has no idea of who the Little Prince really is. It might be safe to say that the King might view the Little Prince as just a visitor to his kingdom or planet, ignoring the fact that his visitor is a prince.
Data (3 - 6)
SL : “I make you my Ambassador,” the king called out, hastily. (1995:78)
TL : “Gelah nadiang Iba Utusan Agung,” Rajané jeg majeritan. (2019:70)
The translator utilizes the lexicon Gelah as it is obvious that the social status or the caste of the King is higher than the main character. Rendering the message that the King does not realize that they both are actually royals also might be another important consideration for the translator to opt for this lexicon. Even though the King does not seem to create a rude impression or belittle the main character by using Gelah as the translation for the subject pronoun I on this Data (3 – 6), however, this utilization can still be identified as an action to consider oneself higher in status toward the other. This utterance is about the order the King gives to the Little Prince. As described in the story, the King possesses a magnificent air of authority. He keeps on giving orders to the Little Prince since he scarcely has a visitor to his own planet. The story also details the moment when he first found that there was someone visiting his planet and feeling consumingly proud of being at last a king over somebody. That somebody is the Little Prince. Considering the character of this King described in the story, therefore the utilization of Basa Andap appears to be the right fit for this context situation.
These six representative data presented in this study show that the subject pronoun I can be translated from English into Balinese through varied different lexicons. Icang, Titiang and Gelah are three among many others. The utilization of these variations strictly depends on the context situation, which binds the communication activity. The context situation addressed here can cover from the context of place when and where the communication takes place to the people involved in the communication activity among many other important factors. This study highlights the latter factor, which is the people involved. The background of the speakers and the interlocutors very much determines the decision in choosing the appropriate subject pronouns in Balinese. People coming from different castes in Bali will constantly adjust their word choices in order to get their messages rendered and make sure they are received well. This study takes the unit of subject pronoun I and shows the possibilities on how it can be adjusted with varied context situation. The background of the speakers and the interlocutors is where the communication’s core concept based upon. Realizing the caste of our interlocutors can help us to navigate the tone of our communication. This is one of the examples of Balinese culture. This study shows that the translator’s decision in choosing the appropriate lexicons to render the closest equivalence is the epitome of translating the culture itself. English does not share this similarity in having different lexicons to indicate one single subject pronoun.
In spite of this difference, the translator does not seem to strictly bind herself to follow the SL. There is an action of prioritizing the TL over the SL, which is shown by the translation product. The translator does not merely utilize one single lexicon to translate the subject pronoun I into Balinese. The translator in fact creates an adjustment in order to present what is familiarly accepted and understood in the TL culture, which are different varieties of lexicons accepted and understood in Balinese culture. This adjustment further marks the strategies that the translator chooses in making sure the best possible way to render the approximate meanings without upsetting the syntactical rule of the SL and also without ignoring the cultural value of the TL.
As the novelty, this present study discovers a strategy in dealing with culture related translation project. The SL in this present study does not address the possibility that one single subject pronoun can possess many different synonyms or varieties. In contrast, the TL in this present study does have different linguistic registers contributed by its culture. Having these registers means that there are a number of varieties in specifying a subject pronoun. The entire analytical process as well as the result of this study lead to a strategic solution translators can take to cope with this type of challenge. The solution is to prioritize the TL by providing the adequate emphasis on the TL instead of sticking with the SL’s syntactical rule. The translator can present these different varieties even though they are not being addressed in the SL. This process is to be conducted under one condition, which is to not change the initial message conveyed by the SL. The translator should have to present the varieties in translating the subject pronoun according to the standard, which is familiarly accepted, understood and read by the TL audiences as the given situation in this present study.
The translator presents a number of various lexicons in translating the English subject pronoun I into Balinese. These varieties include Icang, Titiang and Gelah. These lexicons are the literal translation for I. However, their utilization depends on the social status of the speakers and the interlocutors. Balinese language possesses a number of different linguistic registers. Each of the register addresses the social status of the speakers and the interlocutors. The lexicon Icang is in the category of Basa Sor, specifically the sub category of Basa Kasamen / Kapara. The lexicon Titiang is in the category of Basa Singgih, specifically the sub category of Basa Alus Sor. Meanwhile the lexicon Gelah is in the category of Basa Andap. These varieties are the examples indicating that the translator does not merely attempt to find the closest equivalence for the subject pronoun I from the SL into the TL, but the translator also attempts to present the TL culture in the translation product. Culture always involves in the translation process as it is part of the language that the translation process works very closely with. The cultures, which bind one language to another are always different. In spite of these differences, rendering them in order to create the closest equivalence in meaning as well as to produce a satisfactory translation needs to be always prioritized.
The author would like to thank for all parties who facilitated this research and for at Lembaga Pengelola Dana Pendidikan (LPDP) scholarship or the Indonesian Endowment Fund for Education scholarship under the Indonesian Ministry of Finance to enrol the Ph.D study program in 2020. So, the author would like to thank for Fulbright Foreign Language Teaching Assistant (Fulbright FLTA) scholarship in Asian Languages and Cultures Department at University of Michigan, United States of America in 2018 - 2019.which has supported the research.
References
Andini, Ni Putu Melda., Riana, I Ketut., & Dhanawaty, Ni Made. 2019. Penggunaan Sor Singgih Basa Bali pada Cerpen Berbahasa Bali Siswa SMP Negeri 5 Denpasar. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora, 8(2), 105-111.
Brown, H. D. 1994. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (Third Edition). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall Regents.
Creswell, John W. 2009. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (Third Edition). California: SAGE Publications, Inc.
De Saint – Exupéry, Antoine. 1995. The Little Prince (Translated by Katherine Woods). California: Harcourt Brace & Company.
De Saint – Exupéry, Antoine. 2019. Raja Cenik (Translated by Cokorda Sawitri). Denpasar: PT. Sekali Bali.
Granoka, Ida Wayan Oka, dkk. (1996). Tata Bahasa Baku Bahasa Bali. Denpasar: Balai Penelitian Bahasa.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1979. Exploration in the Function of Language. London: Edward Arnold.
J, Kersthen. (1970). Warna-Warna Bahasa Bali (Dimuat dalam Tata Bahasa Bali). Ende Flores: Arnold Dus.
Jiang, Wenying. 2000. The Relationship between Culture and Language. ELT Journal, 54(4), 328-334.
Kramsch, Claire J. 1993. Context and Culture in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kramsch, Claire J. (1998). Language and Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lazear, Edward P. 1999. Culture and Language. Journal of Political Economy, 107(6), hlm. 95 – 126.
Nida, Eugene. 1998. Language, Culture, and Translation. Foreign Languages Journal, 115(3), 29-33.
Nida, Eugene A & Taber, Charles R. 1982. The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Risager, K. 2006. Language and Culture Pedagogy: From a National to a Transnational Paradigm. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Savitri, Putu Weddha & Dewi, A. A. Sg. Shanti Sari. 2019. Translation Variation of Speech Level in Balinese into Indonesian and English. International Journal of Linguistics and Discourse Analytics, 1(1), 1-7.
Sudaryanto. 2015. Metode dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa (Pengantar Penelitian Wahana Kebudayaan secara Linguistis). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press.
Sutika, I Nyoman Duana. 2019. Penggunaan Anggah Ungguhing Basa Bali: Sebuah Kesantunan dan Penanda Kelas Sosial Masyarakat Bali. Pustaka, 19(2), 68-73.
Suwija, I Nyoman., Mulyawan, I Nyoman Rajeg., & Adhiti, Ida Ayu Iran. 2018. Kamus Anggah-Ungguh Kruna Bali – Indonesia dan Indonesia – Bali. Denpasar: IKIP PGRI Bali.
Tinggen, I Nengah. 1986. Sor Singgih Basa Bali. Singaraja & Denpasar: Rhika Dewata.
Toury, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub. Co.
Biography of Author
Ni Made Ariani is currently a Ph.D student of linguistic study program at Udayana University, Bali, Indonesia. She completed her Master study program in Applied Linguistics – Translation Studies from Udayana University in 2016. She completed her Undergraduate study program in English Literature from Sekolah Tinggi Bahasa Asing (STIBA) Saraswati Denpasar, Bali, in 2013. She received Lembaga Pengelola Dana Pendidikan (LPDP) scholarship or the Indonesian Endowment Fund for Education scholarship under the Indonesian Ministry of Finance to enrol the Ph.D study program in 2020. She received Fulbright Foreign Language Teaching Assistant (Fulbright FLTA) scholarship in Asian Languages and Cultures Department at University of Michigan, United States of America in 2018 - 2019. Her research interests in Linguistics include translation studies, semiotics and cultural studies.
Email: [email protected]
Discussion and feedback