Explicitation and Implicitation of Conjuctive Relation in Target Text of Principle Language Learning and Teaching ( PLLT )

Explicitation, implicitation and meaning change are the kinds of cohesion shift which is the important topic to investigate in translation. The confirmation of explicitation and implicitation translation process and its devices that is adopt by Noor Cholis and Yusi Avianto Pareanom in translating conjuction activites between sentences and clauses from English (ST) to Bahasa (TT). The data of this research are several conjuction which is appear in every chapter from Principle of Language Learning Language. To prove the hypothesis of explicitation based on Blum-Kulka (1986) is also the aim of this research then the analysis about conjuntive relation is Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics Vol. 2(1), 2017 www.ijeltal.org e-ISSN: 2527-8746; p-ISSN: 2527-6492


Introduction
The concept of equivalence in the activity of translating is a very difficult task to attain by the translator.The difficulties of this task because of the differences in language system and rule, such as English and Indonesia.According to Hatim and Mason (1990) state that translation is to show the respect to both the source language (ST) and target language (TL).The respect should be shown by the translator by producing well translated text.It can be achived by maintaining the meaning of ST in TT.Shift is a universal strategy in translation activities to get the equivalence of meaning.However, applying an improper translation strategy in dealing with conjunction relation will guide to the loss of semantic meaning in TT.Baleghizadeh and Sharifi (2010: 57) describe that explicitation is a translation feature which have received a lot of attentation in studies of translation.Some studies about explicitation are related with the shift of cohesion in translation.Blum-Kulka (1986) is the first who takes a discoursal and communicative approach to the study of translation and argues that translation process entails shift in textual and discoursal relationship.In line to that, she points out that the shift occure on two levels, such as cohesion and coherence.The shift of cohesion is affected on the level of explicitation and text meaning.In addition, Blum-Kulka (1986:19) states that explicitation is a universal strategy inherent in the process of language mediation and practiced by language learners, non profesional translator and profesional translator as well.However, the explicitation of TT might lead the redundancy or redundancy can be realized on cohesive explicitness.Olohan and Baker (2000: 157) argues that the explicitation (more redundant) help resolve ambiguity, improve cohesiveness and add linguistics and extralinguistics information.
The investigation of explicitation in translation not only raises our comprehension to the nature of translation process but also enabaling us to explain and predict a situation in translation which have a contribution on translation theory.In this research, the researchers analyzed the explicitation and implicitation of conjunctive relation on principles language learning and teaching (PLLT), by Noor Cholis and Yusi Avianto Pareanom into Bahasa.The researchers choose conjuction relation as an object of this research hence translation conjuction bring a considerable impact.Baker (1992: 218) explains that cohesion is a network of surface relation which link words and expression to other words and expression in a text.it means that cohesion constitutes a characteristic of a text.Semantic relation in the text is significant concept on the process of translation which contribute to the translation interpretation, because meaning is existed within the text.Haliday and Hasan (1976) points out that cohesion does much more than provides continuity and thus creates semantic unity.It is emphasized by Blum-Kulka (1986: 299) states that cohesion is an overt relationship holding between parts of the text, expressed by language specific markers.Cohesion occurs where the interpretation of some element in the discourse is dependent on that of the other, based on Haliday and Hasan (1976:4).

Cohesion
Cohesion is realized by four cohesive devices, they are 1) refernce, 2) ellipsis/subsitution, 3) conjuction and 4) lexical cohesion: repetition, synonym, superordinate and collocation.While, it is realized through grammar and vocabulary, that is why cohesion can be devided into two types, grammatical and lexical.Refernce and Ellipsis/subsitution are grammatical while the lexical cohesion is manifested through lexical item.Conjuntion as the focus of this research is the borderline between lexical cohesion and grammatical.Haliday and Hasan (1976: 7) state that conjuction is mainly grammatical, but with the a lexical component in it.The term of cohesion in this research is related to the Halliday and Hasan (1976:7).There are four cohesive davices as stated above, but the focus of research fall in the conjuction relation as the borderline of lexical cohesion and grammatical.

Conjuctive
Haliday and Hasan (1976: 238) classify the conjuctive relation into four relations: additive, adversative, causal and temporal.In line to that, Baleghizadeh and Sharifi (2010: 60) explain that the additive relation annexes information to the propositional content of the preceding sentences.Adversative relation means that the information to be expressed is contraty to the previous one.The causal relation conveys that some information or event is the result of the condition prior to it.Last, temporal relation expresses a subsequent occurance.The summary table of conjunctive relation which is formulated by Haliday and Hasan (1976: 242-243) used as the theoretical framework in this reaserch.Every conjuctive which is appear in intrasentence on TLL was extracted and investigate in Bahasa (TT).
Conjuctive fall on the concept of cohesion, while cohesion goes to the concept of coherence.The role of conjunctive is to help cohesion and coherence to maintain the translation equivalence.To achive translation equivalence is the highest aspiration of translators.

Equivalence
The illustration can be seen in the following figure 1.
Figure 1.The position of conjunction in translation Beikian et.al (2013: 83) state that conjuctive relation are not dependent on a particular of expression; when a special form of conjuntion is used to cohere two sentences into a text, it does not mean that the relation between them could survive.Halliday and Hasan (1976: 227) describes that conjunctive occur in the particular order.

Shift of Cohesion
Blum-Kulka (1986) states that shift in the types of cohesion marker used in the translation seem to affect translation in one or both of the following direction: 1. Shift in the level of explicitness; i.e. the general level of the target texts' textual explicitness is higher or lower than that of the source text, 2. Shift in text meaning(s); i,e.The explicit and implicit meaning potential of the source text changes through translation.
The above statements are the hypothesis of cohesion shift.Ayomi (2010) states that the rise of the target text's textual explicitness is the result of the process, referred here as explicitation while the fall of the target text's textual explicitness is the result of implicitation process.
Every translation process probability have cohesion shift.Toury (2004: 20) states that "....translation involves explicitation is taken to imply that it only instances of explicitation that will be encountered, to the exclusion of nonexplicitation, let alone implicitation-then the claim is obviously false.In fact, it is not even the case that in any individual instance of translation, more examples of explicitation than implicitation will occur..." Then he continues by stating: " by contrast,.... it is even worse that this 'neutralizing' formulation can easily be taken to imply that the two oppositesexplicitation and implicitation are on equal footing vis-a-vis translation.... precisely because it lacks any indication of probability: would one of the terms be more common, and its occurances more predictable than its opposites?" Briefly, the explicitation and implicitation can be occured with other types of shift in TT.In this research, the occurances of explicitation and implicitation on conjunctive relation become focus of this investigation.

Explicitation
Explicitation is the most important feature of translated text compared to the source text.Through the comparison between ST and TT, explicitation touches the core of translation.Baker (1992) devides four universal feature of translation, 1) simplification, 2) explicitation, 3) normalization or conservation, and 4) leveling out.From the statement above, it means that, explicitation has been claimed to be a universal characteristic of translation.Klaudy (1993) states that explicitation is the technique of making explicit in the target text information that is implicit in the source text.It means that explicitation should make the extra information from the ST into TT, the expansion of the information can be in the form of phrase, caluse, sentence and even a text.The addition of information will strengthen cohesive link, clarification of sentence between differences of cultures and knowledge.
In addition, Seguinot (1988:108) explains that additions that are not justified as structural, stylistic and rhetorical differences between the two languages will show explicitation in translation.In line to that, Seguinot takes a translation into three forms: 1) Something is expressed in the translation which was not in the original, 2) Something which was implied or understood through presupposition in the source text is overtly expressed in the translation, 3) an element in the source text is given greater importance in the translation through focus, emphasis, or lexical choice.
Three forms of translation above relate to the explicitation which affect to the redundancy of target text.Klaudy (1998) classifies the explicitation into four types : a) obligatory, b) optional, c) pragmatic, and d) translation-inherent.According to her definition, obligatory explanation occures when there are syntactic and semantic differences between the two languages involved.Optional explicitation are due to different text-building strategies and stylistic preferences between languages.Pragmatic explicitations are due to different cultures and subsequently different world knowledge whre translators, by adding explanation to translation, explicitate the implicit cultural information in the target language.translation-inherent explicitations are due to the nature of translation process itself.

Implicitation
According to Vinay and Darbelnet (1995: 334 ) explain that implicitation as a stylistic translation technique which consists of making what is explicit in the source language implicit in the target language, relying on the context or the situation for conveying the meaning.It can be occured because the target text norm or culture.In addition to that, Klaudy and Caroly (2016: 15) desribes that, Implicitation occurs, for instance, when a SL unit with a specific meaning is replaced by a TL unit with a more general meaning; when translators combine the meanings of several SL words in one TL word; when meaningful lexical elements of the SL text are dropped in the TL text; when two or more sentences in the ST are conjoined into one sentence in the TT; or, when ST clauses are reduced to phrases in the TT, etc. Perego (2003: 73) and Klaudy and Karoly (2005: 15) defined implicitation into two kinds: 1).Reduction (R), which involves leaving out meaningful ST lexical elements in the TT; 2) Generalisation (G), which involves using TL lexical elements that are semantically less specific than the ST lexical elements.It concludes that there is a particular meaning in ST which is reduced and translated in generic term by the translator because the of norm consideration.The translators must produce the acceptable TT.

Research Methodology
The researchers used the qualitative research method to achive the objectives of this research.The data from PLLT was choosen randomly.Bodgan and Biklen (2007: 45) states that the sample of qualitative is small.It means that the small data is enough from the whole data.The source data consist of ten chapters from the PLLT and it's translation in to Bahasa by Noor Cholis and Yusi Avianto Pareanom.The researchers have decided to analyzed the conjuction from whole the cohesive markers.In fact, the researchers want to know how the translators had used the shift of explicitation and implicitation.This research is categorized descriptive based on Best and James (2006) characteristics: a) they involve hyphothesis formulation and testing, b) they use the logical methods of inducrive-deductive reasoning to arrive at generalization, c) they often employ method randomization so that eror may be estimated when population characteristics are inferred from observation of samples, and d) the variables and procedures are described as accurately and completely as posible so that the study can be replicated by other researchers.Based on the characteristic above particularly point (a), this research investigate whether the hypotheis of cohesion shift based on Blum-Kulka (1986) is accepted or rejected.
The researchers describe the following procedure to achive the research objectives.1).The researchers searched whole conjuction types in ST and TT then Classified their conjuction group based on the theory of Halliday and Hasan (1976) about conjuctive relation.2) Identify the types of shift (explicitation or implicitation) based on Blum-Kulka 1986 approaches. 3) Finally the researcher analyzed and calculated the shift of conjuction from ST to TT and TT to ST.The main focus of this reseach was the shift of explicitation and implicitation.While the addition of conjuction on TT categorized as the explicitation, contrary to that is implicitation.Frequency of their occurrence was calculated while explicitation and implicitation conjunctive relation marker were alalyzed and identified.

Findings
Cohesion shift can be occured in the level of explicitation, implicitation and meaning change.The objective of this research is to confirm whether the hypothesis of Blum-Kulka about explicitness and text meaning.Whether a) the general level of the target texts' textual explicitness is higher or lower than that of the source text.b) the explicit and implicit meaning potential of the source text changes through translation.The result of data analysis is represented in the table 1.From the description of the table above, the researcher found that the frequency of explicitation is the highest (63,52%), while the percentage of implicitation is 28,93% and the meaning change is 7,54%.
Translators adopted two explicitation devices to explicitate the implicit conjuntion relation of the ST such as addition conjuction and omision conjuction.The frequency and persentage of the devices can be seen in the following table 2: Obviously shown in the table above, omision of conjuction in TT has the highest percentage (60%) and the total of conjuction omision is 24 devices while the percentage of addition is 40% with the total addition devises is 16.This investiagtion indicate that four types of conjuntion relation were dominant omitted by the translator.The clarification of frequency and percentage of addition and omision from the whole types of conjuntion relation cen be seen in the following table 3. The table above indicate that 11 addition additive conjunction devices or about 68,75% is added, while 8,33% was ommited for the additive conjuction.Translators added about 25% on adversative conjuction and ommited the adversative conjuction about 45,83%.No addition on the causal conjunction but 33,33% have been ommited on this types of conjuction.The translator added 6,25% to the temporal conjuction and omit about 12,5% on temporal conjuction.

Discussion
Confirmation in cohesion shift in the level of explicitness shift and meaning change shift which is deal with conjunctive relation that applied by Noor Cholis and Yusi Avianto in PLLT is the aim of this research.Blum-Kulka (1986: 300) formulates the explicitation hypothesis, which postulate an observed cohesive explicitness from ST to TT regardless of the increase traceable to differences between the two linguistic and textual system involved.Analysis of data reveals that explicitation is dominant in translating conjunctive devices from ST to TT.It can be seen in the following examples: 1. ST : we know that even adults understand more vocabulary than they ever use in speech, and also perceive more syntactic variation than they actually produce.
From the empirical data above, it is clear that explicitation is occured in translation process.Explicitation process has a bigger portion than implicitation and meaning change.It means that explicitation hypothesis is positive.
Translators of PLLT tend to omit conjunctive relation in translation process.The example from PLLT can be described in the following example: 2. ST : ....the systematic storehouse of reliable knowledge that is now available to us.
It is clear that, the conjuctive relative "that is" was omitted in TT.The omited process make the TT become blur.There are 24 devices of conjuction which experience the omited process, while the addition is 16 devices.It can be seen in the folowing example: 3. ST : Thus, in the case of the question.... TT : Oleh sebab itu berkenaan dengan pertanyaan....
All types of conjunctive relation, conjuction of additive has a bigger portion that experienced cohesion shift.Here is the example of all types of conjunctive and the percentage.The shift which occur above is optional or obligation.It means that, it depends on translators.The table above shown us that level of explicitation shift is lead to the redundancy.It makes the reader become confuse, but some times it solves the ambiguity.In the other hand shift in the level of meaning change is happened on additive and adversative in translation process.It guides to the loss of semantic meaning.Translators competences on a certain linguistic is needed in translation activities.Nababan (2008) describes five translator"s competence such as language competence, textual competence, subject competence, cultural competence and transfer competence.
Similar research is done by, Alladin (2017: 102) rises some problems in translating discourse markers (DMs) on relation conjuction, such as 1) Mistranslating Explicit SL DMs, 2) No translation is given for the implicit SL DMs, and 3) No translation is given for the explicit SL DMs.In addition to that, Beikian, et.al (2013: 81) found that conjuctive relation indicate process of explicitation took a bigger portion in the target text and there are two devices that adopted by the translator: addition of conjunctions and replacing punctuation marks with conjunctions.In line to that, this study also revealed that explicitation have a bigger portion.It means that explicitation plays an important role in translation process.

Conclusion
Blum -Kulka (1986:312) states that the effect of the use of cohesive features in translation on the TL text's level of explicitness on the TL text's overt meaning(s), as compared to the SL text.as the result of this research figure out that shift of cohesion such as explicitation, implicitation and meaning change occur in the target text.consequently, 1) first question of this research is positive, because explicitation, implicitation and meaning change occur in PLLT.2) Addition and omision of conjuction feature are used by the translators in order to explicitate the TT.
3) The realization of additive conjuction has the contribution which make more explicitation in TT while the impact of additive conjuction affect more implicitation, finally, additive conjuction makes more meaning changes in TT.

Table 1 :
Frequency and Percentage of Cohesion Shift

Table 2 :
Frequency of the Explicitation and Implicitation Devices in the TT

Table 3 :
The Frequency of Addition and Omision of Conjunction

Table 4 :
The Calculation of Conjunction Relation

Table 5 :
Four types of conjuctive relative which experience shift of cohesion