EEJ 9 (2) (2019) 206 - 218 English Education Journal https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej Translation Errors in Students’ Indonesian-English Translation Practice Hanifah Nur Najibah Koman, Rudi Hartono, Issy Yuliasri Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia Article Info ________________ Article History: Recived 23 January 2018 Accepted 15 March 2019 Published 20 June 2019 ________________ Keywords: Translation Errors, Student’s Translation, Indonesian-English Translation, ATA’s Standard Errors ____________________ Abstract ___________________________________________________________________ This article discusses the translation errors in Indonesian-English translation practice that were made by the students. It is based on the research in English Education Undergraduate Program, UNNES. Descriptive qualitative research method, specifically qualitative data analysis was used in this research. The subjects of the study were the students in Indonesian-English Translation Course. The object of the research was the Indonesian-English translation product, produced by the students. The object of the study was translation products which were produced by the students. The data were collected by using a translation test, questionnaires, and interviews. Moreover, the data were analyzed using qualitative data analysis. The result of the analysis showed that there were 21 translation errors of 26 error categories according to ATA’s Framework for Standardized Error Making. In conclusion, the three most prominent error categories made by the students were grammar, syntax, and faithfulness error. The errors were mostly influenced by extratextual factors such as sender, intention, recipient, medium, time, motive, and text function. In addition, lexis was also an influencing factor in making errors. © 2019 Universitas Negeri Semarang Correspondence Address: Kampus Pascasarjana Unnes, Jl. Kelud Utara III Semarang 50237, Indonesia E-mail: hanifahkoman@gmail.com p-ISSN 2087-0108 e-ISSN 2502-4566 Hanifah Nur Najibah Koman, Rudi Hartono, Issy Yuliasri / EEJ 9 (2) (2019) 206 - 218 207 INTRODUCTION Translation is needed since it is a crucial task in the process of exchanging information. Translating is not an easy task; it needs good mastery of the source language and also the target language. It is not only translating the text literally from the source language into the target language. Newmark (1988) states that “translation is rendering the meaning of a text into another language in the way that the author intended the text” (as cited in Hartono, 2017, p.10). Furthermore, translation is the replacement of textual material in one language by equivalent textual material in another language (Catford, 1978). Bassnet and Guire (1991) say that translation is the substitution of target language meaning from source language meaning through linguistics studies and the target language culture, the essence of translation lies on meaning. A translator must have a good mastery of the two languages involved (Yuliasri, 2016). In making a good translation product which is easily understood by the readers, a translator must have a good mastery of the two languages. As PACTE (2003) in Albir (2005) proposes, translation competence (TC) is made up of five sub-competencies and physiological components. The sub-competencies are bilingual sub-competence, extra-linguistic sub- competence, knowledge sub-competence, instrumental sub-competence, and strategic sub- competence. Moreover, Angelelli (2009) cited in Sundari & Febriyanti (2016) constructs the components of translation competence, such as grammatical competence including vocabulary, morphology, syntax, and grapheme; textual competence; pragmatic competence including illocutionary and sociolinguistic; and strategic competence. As stated in the previous paragraphs, it can be concluded that it is not an easy task for the translator to make a good translation product. A translator faces many problems either linguistic or non-linguistic. Nord (2001) states that “for pedagogical purposes, translation problems may be categorized as pragmatic, cultural, linguistic or text-specific” (p.64). Those problems may cause errors in translation. Errors arise because of a lack of knowledge about some elements in the source language or the target language. Translation errors are possibly made by the translators. It is also possible to happen in the product of translation made by the students. As we know that the student is not a professional translator, they might make some errors in their translation practice. There are some of the previous studies that concern on the translation errors analysis on the students’ Indonesian-English translation practice. Kuncoro and Sutopo (2015), Purwanti and Mujiyanto (2015), Rahmawatie et.al (2017) and Tiwiyanti and Retnomurti (2017) conducted the researches about Indonesian-English translation in different point of view, namely theme equivalence and theme shift, the ideology, the shift of functional words and the loss and gain in translation. One of the researchers did research on the thesis abstracts, while the others used cultural terms in a novel as the unit of analysis. Another researcher, Hilman (2015), also conducted research on a novel. However, he analyzed the cultural lexicons of the translation. Moreover, related to Indonesian-English text, there were some researches in Indonesian- English bilingual text. Hartati (2013) conducted research on bilingual tourism brochures. Nuraeni et.al. (2016) conducted research on school signboards, while Sipayung (2018) conducted research on bilingual history textbook. Generally, the discussion of the researches was about the quality of the Indonesian-English translation product. In addition, Simatupang and Galingling (2012), Gunawan and Rini (2013), Rahmatillah (2013), Burliani and Winiharti (2016), Hartono and Priyatmojo (2016), Ismail and Hartono (2016), Yuliasri (2016), Napitupulu (2017) and Salam et.al. (2017) conducted the research about translation errors. They classified the type of errors in various typologies. For examples, Hartono and Priyatmojo (2016) divided the type of errors, namely mistranslation into the target language, addition, word choice, too free translated, too literal, grammar, punctuation, and spelling. They discussed the errors in soft drink product labels. Yuliasri (2016) presented the common linguistic errors made by the Hanifah Nur Najibah Koman, Rudi Hartono, Issy Yuliasri / EEJ 9 (2) (2019) 206 - 218 208 students in translating from Indonesian to English. The linguistic errors include diction, technical terms, noun phrase, word class, gerund, number (singular/plural), collocation, parallelism, subject-verb agreement, wh-clause, double predicate, voice (active/passive), and fragment (no predicate). Napitupulu (2017) had also conducted research on translation errors. The result was that there are five types of error in the Indonesian-English translation of abstracts produced by Google Translate, namely lexicosemantic, tense, preposition, word order, distribution and use of verb group, and active and passive voice. Besides, Ambawani (2014), Cahyani et.al. (2015), Tandikombong et.al (2015) and Kamil et.al. (2018) focused their studies only on the grammatical errors in translation. They also classified the type of grammatical errors in various typologies. For example, Ambawani (2014) conducted a research on the grammatical errors of Indonesian-English translation of abstract by Google Translate. The grammatical errors are categorized based on surface strategy taxonomy by Dulay et.al.(1982) namely omission error, addition error, misformation error, and misordering error. Another research conducted by Tandikombong et.al (2015) was aimed at describing the grammatical errors made by the fourth-semester and the sixth-semester students in translating Indonesian into English. There are eight types of translation error; verb, noun, conjunction, pronoun, adjective, adverb, article, and preposition. In conclusion, from the discussion of previous studies above, the study which discusses the translation errors on the students’ Indonesian-English translation product seen from ATA’s Standard of Translation Error has not been done before. Therefore, this study is important to be implemented. Thus, the researchers conducted research about the translation errors seen from ATA’s Standard of Translation Error. Furthermore, error analysis is needed to find out the translation errors in Indonesian - English translation product. Certain areas of difficulties can be known by this error analysis. Therefore, the researchers carried out a descriptive study related to the translation error analysis on the students’ translation practice. The focus of the analysis is based on the ATA’s category of translation errors. METHOD This study used a descriptive qualitative method, specifically qualitative data analysis technique. Content analysis technique was employed since it is suitable to be used in analyzing the phenomenon of students’ errors in translating Indonesian text into English. The Subjects of this research were the students in Indonesian-English Translation Course of English Education Undergraduate Program, Universitas Negeri Semarang (UNNES), while the object of this research is translation product, produced by the students. The translation product was taken from the pre-test of the Indonesian-English translation course. The test consists of some texts that should be translated from Indonesian into English. The instrument for collecting data of this study consists of a test, questionnaires, and interviews. The test is in the form of translation writing test that consists of instructions and the Indonesian text that should be translated into English. The test was conducted as the pre-test of the Indonesian-English translation course. Moreover, this study uses a questionnaire and interview as the method of data collection. The questionnaire and interview are intended to find out the reason for the students’ error making. The questionnaire is the data collection method by giving a written set of statements to the informants related to translation errors. The questionnaire in this research use scale items in responding to the items. It was made based on the factors of translating a text. An interview is an activity of getting information by giving some questions to the participant of the research which generates data about translation error from the participant’s perspective. Moreover, the technique used in analyzing the data is qualitative data analysis. Miles and Huberman (1994, pp.10-11) proposes the steps in analyzing the data in qualitative data analysis. The steps are data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing and verification. Hanifah Nur Najibah Koman, Rudi Hartono, Issy Yuliasri / EEJ 9 (2) (2019) 206 - 218 209 RESULT AND DISCUSSION Result In this part, the writers present translation errors on the students’ translation and the reasons for translation errors. Translation Errors on The Student’s Translation The result of the analysis on the students’ Indonesian-English translation shows that there are 21 translation errors of 26 error categories based on the ATA’s Standard of Translation Error. They are the addition, ambiguity, capitalization, cohesion, faithfulness, grammar, indecision, mistranslation, misunderstanding, omission, punctuation, register, spelling, style, syntax, terminology, unfinished, usage, verb tense, word form/part of speech, and other errors. The sum of the translation errors made by the students is shown in table 4.1. The three most prominent error categories made by the students are grammar, syntax, and faithfulness. Grammar becomes the highest category of translation errors which appeared 141 times or 14,3 % of errors found in the analysis. It is followed by syntax 12,1 % and faithfulness 10,2 %. The other error categories were made by the students under 10 %. There are examples of data analysis based on the findings on students’ translation errors. Table 1. The Sum of Translation Errors No. Translation Errors Frequen cy Percenta ge (%) 1 Addition (A) 50 5.1 2 Ambiguity (AMB) 12 1.2 3 Capitalization (C) 40 4.1 4 Cohesion (COH) 13 1.3 5 Diacritical Marks / Accents (D) 0 0.0 6 Faithfulness (F) 101 10.2 7 Faux ami (FA) 0 0.0 8 Grammar (G) 141 14.3 9 Illegibility (ILL) 0 0.0 10 Indecision (IND) 13 1.3 11 Literalness (L) 0 0.0 No. Translation Errors Frequen cy Percenta ge (%) 12 Mistranslation (MT) 49 5.0 13 Misunderstandin g (MU) 7 0.7 14 Omission (O) 92 9.3 15 Punctuation (P) 27 2.7 16 Register (R) 14 1.4 17 Spelling (SP) 26 2.6 18 Style (ST) 30 3.0 19 Syntax (SYN) 119 12.1 20 Terminology (T) 46 4.7 21 Text Type (TT) 0 0.0 22 Unfinished (UNF) 10 1.0 23 Usage (U) 45 4.6 24 Verb Tense (VT) 33 3.3 25 Word Form / Part of Speech (WF) 78 7.9 26 Other Errors (OTH) 41 4.2 Total 987 100 Addition An addition error occurs when the translator introduces superfluous information or stylistic effects. Example: ST : Ini merupakan suatu upaya pembinaan yang ditujukan bagi anak sejak lahir sampai dengan usia enam tahun ….. LT : It is a founding effort which is addressed to the child from birth until six years old ….. TT : It is an effort from government to children until six years old …. Note: ST =Source Text, LT=Literal Text, TT=Target Text The meaning of the underlined words on the target text “from government” was not mentioned on the source text. The phrase suatu upaya (an effort) on the source text, was translated into “an effort from government”. The translator wrote additional information which was not written on the source text in the sentence. The additional information came from the translator himself/herself. Therefore, the meaning of the target text is different from the Hanifah Nur Najibah Koman, Rudi Hartono, Issy Yuliasri / EEJ 9 (2) (2019) 206 - 218 210 source text. The word “usaha” (effort) on the source text does not necessarily mean an effort from government, it may mean an effort from the other party. In conclusion, the phrase “from government” belongs to additional error of translation. Ambiguity An ambiguity error occurs when either the source or target text segment allows for more than one semantic interpretation. Example: ST : Seperti yang ditulis Nida dan Taber (1974), penerjemahan harus bertujuan menyampaikan pesan. LT : As written by Nida and Taber (1974), translation should be aimed to deliver a message. TT : As if Nida and Taber (1974), translation aimed to deliver message. On the underlined phrase, the word “if” causes ambiguity in the target text. The meaning of that phrase can be mean as “As though Nida and Taber” or “Meanwhile, if Nida with Taber”. It seems that the translator should replace the word “if” and add a word after that phrase such as “state” or “wrote”, in order to make the phrase is clearly understood. Then, it becomes “As Nida and Taber (1974) wrote, ….”. From the explanation above, it can be concluded that the underlined phrase is categorized into ambiguity error of translation. Capitalization A capitalization error occurs when the conventions of the target language concerning upper and lower case usage are not followed. Example: ST : Pendidikan anak usia dini (PAUD) adalah jenjang pendidikan sebelum jenjang pendidikan dasar. LT : Early Childhood Education (ECE) is an educational level before the elementary educational level. TT : Early childhood education is a level of education before Elementary School level. The underlined noun phrase on the target text, “Early childhood education”, seems good at glance. It was translated from the source text Pendidikan anak usia dini (Early Childhood Education). However, the form of the letters concerning upper case and lower case is not correct. According to the electronic dictionary, Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary: Third Edition, the phrase “Early childhood education” should be capitalized each word. It becomes “Early Childhood Education” that is abbreviated as ECE. For the reason above, the sample is categorized into capitalization error. Cohesion A cohesion error occurs when a text is hard to follow because of inconsistent use of terminology, misuse of pronouns, inappropriate conjunctions, or other structural errors. Example: ST : Menurut Larson, dalam penerjemahan dimungkinkan adanya perubahan bentuk. LT : According to Larson, in translation, it is possible of form change. TT : According to Larson, this has been possible form change. The underlined word (this) does not refer to any other word on the sentence. So, it makes the readers do not understand what the meaning of “this” on the target text is. On the translator’s view, the word “this” is aimed to replace the phrase dalam penerjemahan (in translation). However, the phrase is not stated on the sentence. Therefore, the translated text does not deliver the meaning of the source text properly. The phrase dalam penerjemahan (in translation) should be translated into “in translation” instead of “this”. The explanation above shows that cohesion error in translation occurred on the sample Faithfulness A faithfulness error occurs when the target text does not respect the meaning of the source text as much as possible. Example: ST: Penerjemahan menurut Hoed (2006) adalah kegiatan mengalihkan secara tertulis pesan dari teks suatu bahasa ke dalam teks bahasa lain. LT : Translation according to Hoed (2006) is an activity of replacing in writing the message of a language text into another language text. Hanifah Nur Najibah Koman, Rudi Hartono, Issy Yuliasri / EEJ 9 (2) (2019) 206 - 218 211 TT: Translation according to Hoed (2006) is a replacement of message from sourced text into targeted text. The error on this sample is between the phrases teks suatu bahasa ke dalam teks bahasa lain (a language text into another language text) and “sourced text into targeted text”. The meaning of those phrases on the source text and the targeted text is not significantly different. However, the form and meaning of the target text do not respect the source text completely. On the sample above, the phrase teks suatu bahasa (a language text) was translated into “sourced text”. Moreover, as seen from the form, the phrase “sourced text” is incorrect; it should be “source text”. Meanwhile, as seen from the meaning, the phrase “sourced text” is different from teks suatu bahasa (a language text) which is better to be translated into “text of a language” or “a language text”. Summarily, the phrases “sourced text into targeted text” can be categorized into faithfulness error of translation. Grammar A grammar error occurs when a sentence in the translation violates the grammatical rules of the target language. Example: ST: … dan penyelenggaraannya di beberapa negara, PAUD dilaksanankan sejak usia 0-8 tahun (masa emas). LT : … and its implementation in some countries, ECE is implemented since 0-8 years (golden period). TT: … and its implementation in some countries, PAUD implemented since 0-8 years (golden period). The underlined words on the example above “PAUD implemented” is seen as a correct form at glance. However, if it is seen from the source text of those words, it becomes an incorrect form. The words “PAUD implemented” was translated from the words PAUD dilaksanakan (ECE is implemented). The word PAUD (Early Childhood Education/ECE) is actually as an object on the sentence because the sentence on the source text is a passive form. However, on the target text, that word becomes the subject of the sentence. Therefore, it is better to add a finite “is” before the word “implemented”. Then it becomes “ECE is implemented”. According to the explanation above, it is summarized that there is a grammatical error on the sample above. Indecision An indecision error occurs when the translator gives more than one option for a given translation unit. Example: ST : Seperti yang ditulis Nida dan Taber (1974), penerjemahan harus bertujuan menyampaikan pesan. LT : As written by Nida and Taber (1974), translation should be aimed to deliver a message. TT : Just like what Nida and Taber (1974) wrote/said, tranlating must have a purpose to deliver a message. The translator translated the word ditulis (is written) into “wrote/said”, whereas the meaning of those two words (wrote and said) is different. So, the options from the translator are not appropriate. The word “said” is better to be deleted because the meaning does not follow the source text’s meaning ditulis (is written). The word “wrote” is better to be chosen. In conclusion, giving more than one option which have different meaning in translating a word belongs to an indecision error of translation. Mistranslation A mistranslation error occurs when the meaning of a segment of the original text is not conveyed properly in the target language. Example: ST : Catford menekankan bahwa penerjemahan harus berbasis pada kesepadanan. LT : Catford emphasizes that translation should be based on equality. TT : Catford emphasized that translation must based on contextual conditioning. The error on the sample above is between the word kesepadanan (equality) and “contextual conditioning”. The meaning of “contextual conditioning” is pengkondisian kontekstual (maintaining in a context). Therefore, the translated text is not proper to replace the source text’s meaning. The word kesepadanan (equality) can be translated into “equality”. As the result, Hanifah Nur Najibah Koman, Rudi Hartono, Issy Yuliasri / EEJ 9 (2) (2019) 206 - 218 212 ecause of an inappropriate translation, the sample above is categorized into mistranslation error. Misunderstanding A misunderstanding error occurs when the grader can see that the error arises from misreading a word. Example: ST : Menurut Larson, dalam penerjemahan dimungkinkan adanya perubahan bentuk. LT : According to Larson, in translation, it is possible of form change. TT : According to Larson, in translation of changes in the form of possible. The sample above shows misinterpreting the structure of the sentence. The meaning of the source text was not delivered properly into the target text. The translator did not use the prepositions “in” and “of” correctly. Therefore, the meaning of the translated text is confusing. It is better for the translator to change the underlined words, “in translation of changes in the form of possible.”, into “in translation, it is possible of form change.”. It means that the translator should use the preposition “of” properly and add the finite “is” to make the sentence comprehensible. In conclusion, this error is categorized into misunderstanding error. Omission An omission error occurs when an element of information in the source text is left out of the target text. Example: ST : Menurut Larson, dalam penerjemahan dimungkinkan adanya perubahan bentuk. LT : According to Larson, in translation, it is possible of form change. TT : Based on Larson, it exists on changing form. The underlined words, dalam penerjemahan dimungkinkan (in translation, it is possible), were omitted which then caused incomplete message delivering. The message from the source text does not conveyed completely. The translator preferred to use a pronoun “it” instead of “in translation, it is possible”. In sum, the example belongs to omission error in translation since the omission of some words caused incomplete delivering of the source text message. Punctuation A punctuation error occurs when the conventions of the target language regarding punctuation are not followed. Example: ST : Seperti yang ditulis Nida dan Taber (1974), penerjemahan harus bertujuan menyampaikan pesan. LT : As written by Nida and Taber (1974), translation should be aimed to deliver a message. TT : As written by Nida and Taber (1974) translation should aim at conveying the message. Highlighted the underlined words after the writing of year in parenthesis, it should be a comma. However, in the target text, there is not a comma written between the year in the parenthesis “(1974)” and the following word “translation”. The translator should add a comma between “(1974)” and “translation” for a better structure of the sentence. From the explanation above, that sample can be categorized as punctuation error since the omission of a comma between those words. Register A register error occurs when the language level or degree of formality produced in the target text is not appropriate for the target audience. Example: ST : Seperti yang ditulis Nida dan Taber (1974), penerjemahan harus bertujuan menyampaikan pesan. LT : As written by Nida and Taber (1974), translation should be aimed to deliver a message. TT : Just like the written by Nida and Taber (1974), a translation must have a purpose to deliver the message. The example of register error is on the words “just like”. Those words sound informal. The source text of those words is the word seperti (As). In order to make the word politer, the translator should change the words “just like” into “as”. Therefore, based on the reason above, Hanifah Nur Najibah Koman, Rudi Hartono, Issy Yuliasri / EEJ 9 (2) (2019) 206 - 218 213 we can say that the sample above indicates a register error in translation. Spelling A spelling/character error occurs when a word or character in the translation is spelled/used incorrectly according to target- language conventions. Example: ST : Penerjemahan menurut Hoed (2006) adalah kegiatan mengalihkan secara tertulis pesan dari teks suatu bahasa ke dalam teks bahasa lain. LT : Translation according to Hoed (2006) is an activity of replacing in writing the message of a language text into another language text. TT : According to Hoed (2006), translating is an activity of replacing a message from the test of a language into another language test in the written form. The error is on the word “test” above. The word “test” means “exam”. However, the source text teks (text) has different meaning from the meaning of “test”. It can be seen that the translator wrote the wrong spelling of the word “text” by changing the alphabet “x” into “s”. As the result, the meaning of the target text is different from the source text. In sum, it is called as spelling error. Style A style error occurs when the style of the translation is inappropriate for publication or professional. Example: ST : Rentangan anak usia dini menurut pasal 28 UU Sisdiknas No.20/2003 ayat 1 adalah 0-6 tahun. LT : The range of early childhood according to the Law of National Education System Article 28 Number 20/2003 Clause 1 is 0-6 years old. TT : The range of early childhood according to UU Sisdiknas Pasal 28 No. 20/2003 ayat 1 is 0-6 years old. The translator did not translate the particular term UU (Law), pasal (article), and ayat (clause). The term UU/Undang-undang (Law) can be translated into “Law”, pasal (article) can be translated into “article”, and ayat (clause) can be translated into “clause”. Moreover, it may cause a confusion to the reader of the target text if the translator keeps the original text. The term should be translated into the target text, so the reader understands clearly. Summarily, the sample above indicates the error of style in translation. Syntax A syntax error occurs when the arrangement of words or other elements of a sentence does not conform to the syntactic rules of the target language. Example: ST : Rentangan anak usia dini menurut pasal 28 UU Sisdiknas No.20/2003 ayat 1 adalah 0-6 tahun. LT : The range of early childhood according to the Law of National Education System Article 28 Number 20/2003 Clause 1 is 0-6 years old. TT : The age length for children in PAUD according to Law Sisdiknas (system education national) No. 20/2003 article 28 clause no. 1 is 0-6 years old. The sample above indicates the error on the underlined phrase “system education national”. The reason is that the word order on the phrase is incorrect. Om the noun phrase, the main word should be on the last part of the phrase. However, in the sample above, the main word is placed in the initial phrase. It is better for the translation to change the phrase “system education national” into “national education system”. In conclusion, the phrase on the target text above belongs to a syntax error. Terminology A terminology error occurs when a term appropriate to a specific subject field is not used when the corresponding term is used in the source text. Example: ST : Penerjemahan menurut Hoed (2006) adalah kegiatan mengalihkan secara tertulis pesan dari teks suatu bahasa ke dalam teks bahasa lain. LT : Translation according to Hoed (2006) is an activity of replacing in writing the message of a language text into another language text. Hanifah Nur Najibah Koman, Rudi Hartono, Issy Yuliasri / EEJ 9 (2) (2019) 206 - 218 214 TT : Translation according to Hoed (2006) is an activity of diverting the message of a text from a native language into target language. The word “diverting” on the sample above is the translation of the word mengalihkan (transferring). The term “diverting” is not appropriate to replace the word mengalihkan (transferring). The meaning of “diverting” is changing the direction of someone or something. That meaning is not appropriate with the meaning on the source text. It is better for the translator to use the term “transferring” instead of “diverting”. Summarily, the error on the sample above is categorized into terminology error. Unfinished A substantially unfinished passage is not graded. Example: ST : Rentangan anak usia dini menurut pasal 28 UU Sisdiknas No.20/2003 ayat 1 adalah 0-6 tahun. LT : The range of early childhood according to the Law of National Education System Article 28 Number 20/2003 Clause 1 is 0-6 years old. TT : The …… of early childhood based on Pasal 28 UU Sisdiknas No.23/2003 ayat 1 is 0-6 years old. As it is seen on the target text, the translator did not finish in translating the word Rentangan (Range). He / She left a blank space after the word “The” on the underlined part. The blank space there, should be filled by the word “range”. However, the translator left a blank space instead. Therefore, because of the unfinished writing of the translation, it indicates an unfinished error. Usage A usage error occurs when conventions of wording in the target language are not followed. Example: ST : Pendidikan anak usia dini (PAUD) adalah jenjang pendidikan sebelum jenjang pendidikan dasar. LT : Early Childhood Education (ECE) is an educational level before the elementary educational level. TT : Kindergarten is the level of education before elementary or primary school. The use of the word “kindergarten” to replace Pendidikan anak usia dini (Early Childhood Education) was not appropriate. The meaning of translated text did not represent the meaning of the target text properly. The translator should be better to translate the phrase into “Early Childhood Education”. Therefore, because the convention of wording in the target language is not follow the source text, it is called as usage error. Verb Tense A verb tense error occurs when the translation includes a verb in the grammatically correct form (person, number, gender, etc.) but conjugated in a tense (and/or mood, aspect, etc.) that conveys a different meaning from the source text. Example: ST : … , PAUD dilaksanankan sejak usia 0-8 tahun (masa emas). LT : …, ECE is implemented since 0-8 years (golden period). TT : … , ECE was held since the age of 0- 8 years (golden age). The form of the underlined word is grammatically correct. However, the aspect does not convey the meaning of the source text properly. The source text is dilaksanakan (is implemented). It should not be past tense, but present tense. On the target text, the translator uses the finite “was” which indicates past time. However, it should be corrected into the finite “is”. Therefore, it becomes “is held or is implemented” instead of “was held”. The explanation above is the reason of verb tense error. Word Form A word form error occurs when the root of the word is correct, but the form of the word is incorrect or nonexistent in the target language. Example: ST : Penerjemahan menurut Hoed (2006) adalah kegiatan mengalihkan secara tertulis pesan dari teks suatu bahasa ke dalam teks bahasa lain. LT : Translation according to Hoed (2006) is an activity of replacing in writing the Hanifah Nur Najibah Koman, Rudi Hartono, Issy Yuliasri / EEJ 9 (2) (2019) 206 - 218 215 message of a language text into another language text. TT : According to Hoed (2006), translation is an activity of replacement a written message from a text in a language to a text in another language. The word “replacement” is not appropriate in the form of word. It should be replaced into “replacing”. Then it becomes “activity of replacing”. However, if the translator wanted to use the word “replacement”, it should become “replacement of”, not “activity of replacement”. The error on writing the form or part of speech of the word above indicates a word form error. Other Errors For errors that do not clearly fit the descriptions above, there are two sub-categories: for meaning transfer errors that change or distort the content of the source text and for mechanical errors. Example: ST : …, perlu diingat bahwa terjemahan yang baik tidak dirasa seperti hasil terjemahan ketika dibaca. LT : …, keep in mind that a good translation is not felt as the result of translation when it is read. TT : … , it is important to remember that a good translation is felt like nontranslated when being read. The error is on the word “nontranslated”. The reason is not related to the meaning of word, but the form of writing the word. The word “nontranslated” should be separated by a hyphen. The hyphen is placed after the word “non”, then it becomes “non-translated”. The error occurred on the sample above is categorized into mechanical error. Reasons for Translation Errors Table 2. Reason for Translation Errors No. Factors Score Percen tage Catego ry 1 Sender 88 84.6 High 2 Intention 84 80.8 High 3 Recipient 89 85.6 High 4 Medium 85 81.7 High 5 Place 78 75.0 Quite High 6 Time 79 76.0 High 7 Motive 79 76.0 High 8 Text Function 86 82.7 High 9 Subject Matter 66 63.5 Quite High 10 Content 63 60.6 Quite High 11 Presuppos itions 55 52.9 Quite High 12 Text Compositi on 78 75.0 Quite High 13 Non- verbal Element 52 50.0 Medi um 14 Lexis 87 83.7 High According to the result of the questionnaire above, the factors that highly influence the errors making were the sender, intention, recipient, medium, time, motive, text function, and lexis. Then, the factors that quite highly influence the translation errors were the place, subject matter, content, presuppositions, text composition, sentence structure, and suprasegmental features. Furthermore, the lowest influence factor among others was the non-verbal element. The elaboration of each factor was written in the following paragraphs. Discussion Each student made translation errors around 9 until 18 categories of translation errors. Based on the result of analysis on 15 sentences Hanifah Nur Najibah Koman, Rudi Hartono, Issy Yuliasri / EEJ 9 (2) (2019) 206 - 218 216 that were translated by the students, each student made 21 until 58 times of translation errors. It indicates that the errors made by the students frequently occurred. The findings above in line with a theory from Corder (1987) cited in Nuril (2014, p. 10) who mentions that error is a systematic deviation when a learner has not learned something and consistently gets it wrong; it is a systematic deviation from the norms of the target language being learned. Furthermore, the errors happened on the three categories, namely grammar, syntax, and faithfulness. Translation errors in Indonesian- English translation by EFL students of Indonesia are also influenced by their writing competences. Haryanto (2007) states that the most frequent writing errors are grammatical errors, while Hariri (2012) revealed a study of morpho-syntactic errors in student writing. Grammatical and syntactic errors in translation happened because of the lack of knowledge about the rules in arranging or combining the words into a good sentence. Meanwhile, faithfulness errors happened because of the lack of vocabularies in English, so they cannot find the appropriate word in English from the Indonesian words. Whereas the students on the sixth- semester of English Education Department had learned about grammar and syntax, but they have not expert yet about those materials. They can be categorized into intermediate learners of English as a Foreign Language. It can be said that their lack of knowledge became the factor of their errors making. Moreover, from the result of the questionnaire, mostly the factors influencing the errors were extratextual factors such as sender, intention, recipient, medium, time, motive, and text function. Extratextual factors are the factors outside the source text. It indicates that they will seriously translate the text if the extratextual factors are suitable, but actually, the extratextual factors, when they translated the text being analyzed in this study, is not suitable at all. Therefore, it can be the reasons of making translation errors. One more factor that most influenced the translation errors based on the questionnaire was lexis. It means that their lack of vocabularies in English was also influencing the translation errors. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTION According to the result of the analysis, it can be concluded that there are 21 translation errors of 26 error categories based on the ATA’s Standard of Translation Error by the students. The errors are the addition, ambiguity, capitalization, cohesion, faithfulness, grammar, indecision, literalness, mistranslation, misunderstanding, omission, punctuation, register, spelling, style, syntax, terminology, unfinished, usage, verb tense, word form/part of speech, and other errors. The three most prominent error categories made by the students are grammar, syntax, and faithfulness. Grammar becomes the highest category of translation errors which appeared 141 times or 14,2 % of errors found in the analysis. It is followed by syntax 12 % and faithfulness 10,2 %. The other error categories were made by the students under 10 %. Moreover, related to the factors influencing translation errors, the factors that highly influence the errors making were the sender, intention, recipient, medium, time, motive, text function, and lexis. Then, the factors that quite highly influence the translation errors were the place, subject matter, content, presuppositions, text composition, sentence structure, and suprasegmental features. Last, the lowest influence factor among others was the non-verbal element. From the result of the study that the researchers had done, there are some suggestions that the researchers want to offer especially to the students of English Education Undergraduate Program and the next researchers. For the students of English Education Undergraduate Program, they should be realized of their translation errors making. In this case, they can realize by doing more practice, peer correcting, and re-read the translation text. Moreover, they must understand the rules and culture of the target language to minimize errors. For the next Hanifah Nur Najibah Koman, Rudi Hartono, Issy Yuliasri / EEJ 9 (2) (2019) 206 - 218 217 researchers, the results of this study are expected to be used as a reference for developing similar research, especially on the English Education students’ translation errors. The other researchers can develop the research using different categories of errors and the factors of making the errors. REFERENCES Albir, A. H. (2005). Investigating translation competence: Conceptual and methodological issues. Meta, 50(2), 609- 619. Ambawani, S. (2014). Grammatical errors on Indonesian-English translation by Google Translate. Seminar Nasional Aplikasi Sains dan Teknologi (pp. 333-338). Yogyakarta: Institut Sains dan Teknologi AKPRIND Yogyakarta. Ardi, H. (2016). The impact of translation techniques toward the quality of translation: A case study on a social text. Humanus, 15(2), 142-153. Basnett, S., & Mc Guire. (1991). Translation Studies. London: Longman. Burliani, S., & Winiharti, M. (2016). Innacuracy in Indonesian subtitles of The King’s speech movie 2010. Lingua Cultura, 10(1), 57-62. Cahyani, S., Wijaya, B., & Arifin, Z. (2015). An analysis of students’ grammatical errors in Indonesian-English translation. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran, 4(3), 1-9. Catford, J. (1978). A Linguistic Theory of Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gunawan, F., & Rini, J. (2013). Translation errors in English-Indonesian humor text produced by students of basic translation class. Kata Kita (Journal of Literature, Language, and Teaching), 1(1), 154-163. Hariri, M. (2012). Taxonomy of morpho- syntactic errors and error analysis. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering, and Technology, 4(22), 4856- 4850. Hartati, E. (2013). Translation analysis in bilingual tourism brochure: Translating Indonesian to English. The 2nd ELTLT International Conference (pp. 380-394). Semarang: Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Semarang. Hartono, R. (2017). Pengantar Ilmu Penerjemahan. Semarang: Cipta Prima Nusantara. Hartono, R., & Priyatmojo, A. (2016). Translation errors of soft drink product labels from Indonesian into English. The International Seminar Prasasti III (pp. 659- 664). Surakarta: Linguistics Doctoral Program of Sebelas Maret University. Hilman, E. (2015). The translation of Indonesian cultural lexicons in the novel Saman. Lingua Cultura, 9(1), 67-74. Ismail, A., & Hartono, R. (2016). Errors made in Google Translate in the Indonesian to English Translations of news item texts. Journal of English Language Teaching, 5(2), 1-6. Kamil, R., Irhamni, & Murtadho, N. (2018). Kesalahan gramatikal dan penerjemahan literal buku Durusun Iqtishadiyatun Min Ramadlan. Bahasa dan Seni, 46(1), 82-95. Kuncoro, H., & Sutopo, D. (2015). The ideology in the Indonesian-English translation of cultural terms. English Education Journal, 5(2), 8-13. Napitupulu, S. (2017). Analyzing Indonesian- English abstracts translation in view of translation errors by Google Translate. International Journal of English Language and Linguistics Research, 5(2), 15-23. Nord, C. (2001). Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press. Nuraeni, A., Kusumastuti, F., & Nababan, M. (2016). A translation study on school signboards in Surakarta: Types, functions, and quality. Humaniora, 28(2), 198-207. Nuril, T. (2014). Analysis of Grammatical Errors in Speaking English by Students Islamic Modern Boarding School “Al-Amanah” Krian. Surabaya: English Letters and Language Department, Sunan Ampel State Islamic University. Purwanti, S., & Mujiyanto, Y. (2015). The ideology in the Indonesian to English translation of cultural terms in Toer’s Bumi Manusia. English Education Journal, 5(2), 63-69. Rahmatillah, K. (2013). Translation errors in the process of translation. Journal of English and Education, 7(1), 14-24. Rahmawatie, E., Engliana, & Miranti, I. (2017). Rahmawatie, I., Engliana and Miranti, I. (2017). The shifts of functional words in the translation of Toer’s Bumi Manusia into English by Max Lane. Language Circle, 11(2), 127-135. Ratnasari, W., Yuliasri, I., & Hartono, R. (2016). Technique and ideology of Hanifah Nur Najibah Koman, Rudi Hartono, Issy Yuliasri / EEJ 9 (2) (2019) 206 - 218 218 vocatives and proper names in The Hobbit. Language Circle, 9(1), 97-106. Salam, Z., Akil, M., & Rahman, A. (2017). Translation errors made by Indonesian- English translators in crowdsourcing translation application. ELT Wordwide, 4(2), 195-204. Simatupang, M., & Galingling, Y. (2012). Errors in English ads and fallacious trends of job advertisement in Jakarta. Jurnal Lingua Cultura, 6(1), 1-13. Sipayung, K. (2018). The impact of translation shift and method on translation accuracy found at bilingual history textbook. Humaniora, 30(1), 58-66. Sundari, H., & Febriyanti, R. H. (2016). Translation Techniques and Translation Competence in translating Informative Text for Indonesian EFL Learners. Journal of English Language Teaching, 17- 28. Tandikombong, M., Atmowardoyo, H., & Weda, S. (2015). Grammatical errors in the English translation made by the students of English study program of UKI Toraja. ELT Wordwide, 3(1), 1-14. Tiwiyanti, L., & Retnomurti, A. (2017). Loss and gain in translation of cultural-specific items in Ahmad Tohari’s Lintang Kemukus: A semantic study. Lingua Cultura, 11(1), 1-6. Yuliasri, I. (2015). Students’ choice of translation techniques and quality of their translation. The 4th ELTLT International Conference (pp. 389-395). Semarang: Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Semarang. Yuliasri, I. (2016). Students’ common errors in translation. The 5th ELTLT International Conference (pp. 325-329). Semarang: Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Semarang.