Pengaruh Teknologi dalam Penerjemahan Mengikuti Adat Bahasa

PENGARUH TEKNOLOGI DALAM PENERJEMAHAN MENGIKUTI ADAT BAHASA

Marsal Sintung

Dalam sebuah forum aktif mahasiswa berbasis online di Universitas Terbuka jurusan Sastra Inggris Minat Penerjemahan, saya pernah mendapatkan pertanyaan meskipun itu bukan di forum saya sebagai mahasiswa. Seseorang pernah bertanya: "Menurutmu apakah perkembangan teknologi memiliki pengaruh dalam adat bahasa?" Saya mencoba untuk berkontribusi juga dengan dalih bahwa saya suka pertanyaannya. Nyatanya pertanyaan ini menantang untuk menggali kepekaan kita terhadap aktivitas penerjemahan Bahasa Indonesia sebagai bahasa sasaran.

Saya sempat memberi pendahuluan, bahwa apa yang saya tangkap dari pertanyaan dari siswa tersebut merupakan sebuah penemuan saya akan semacam gagasan inti mengenai bagaimana peran teknologi mengambil bagian dalam aktivitas manusia untuk memproduksi bahasa.

Tidak perlu repot memikirkan contoh konkret yang jauh. Saya coba sajikan untuk kita satu contoh fenomena sederhana. Kita tahu bersama kita sekarang hidup di dalam era teknologi informasi yang menuntut kecepatan perolehan data dan keperluan lainnya untuk hidup yang lebih baik. Kita tahu untuk menunjang hal tersebut, salah satu yang kita perlukan adalah telepon. Seiring waktu berjalan, telepon memiliki banyak transformasi bentuk hingga apa yang kita kenal sekarang telepon selular.

Dengan berbagai inovasi dan kreasi, telepon selular pun mendapatkan berbagai tambahan fitur seperti apa yang kita tahu sekarang, kamera (telepon selular). Apa yang kita lakukan dengan kamera tersebut adalah menangkap berbagai gambar yang ada di depannya, termasuk diri kita sendiri!

Aktivitas untuk memotret diri sendiri dengan menggunakan kamera telepon selular makin lama makin menjelma menjadi sebuah perilaku yang lazim dibanding memotret diri sendiri dengan menggunakan kamera digital atau kamera profesional lainnya (bayangkan saja LOL). Seiring perilaku ini mendapatkan bagiannya dalam tingkah laku manusia, hal ini membuat manusia memberikan atribut kebahasaan dengan sebutan apa yang populer saat ini kita tahu sebagai selfie.

Mari kita tinjau kata tersebut. Konstruksi kata terdiri dari dua elemen, self=diri sebagai morfem bebas dan -ie=sufiks (imbuhan yang menegaskan kata benda). Bahkan dari dua konstruksi kata tersebut yang tidak menyeret makna picture=gambar di dalamnya, penutur bahasa menafsirkan selfie sebagai aktivitas memotret diri sendiri. Lebih detail lagi, untuk aktivitas memotret orang pertama jamak terciptalah ungkapan wefie. We=kita, self=diri, dan -ie=sufiks. Wow!

Kita kembali pada adat sebagai bagian dari budaya. Jelas ini bukanlah istilah dalam Bahasa Indonesia sebagai bahasa sasaran dari terjemahan Bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa sumber. Kita sebagai masyarakat penutur bahasa sasaran ini hanya bisa menikmati inovasi (cellular phone) dan label aktivitas inovasi itu (selfie-wefie). Proses penerjemahan ini pastinya adalah proses yang termasuk dalam penerjemahan mengikuti Adat Bahasa. Kita bisa saja tidak perlu menerjemahkan ungkapan tersebut secara literal, mengingat dalam kamus Bahasa Inggris saja masih belum memuat istilah tersebut ke dalam perbendaharaan kata, dan penafsiran ungkapan itu hanyalah bercermin pada respon manusia atas tindakan tersebut.

Yang menjadi pertanyaan baru atas fenomena ini sebenarnya untuk kita sebagai masyarakat yang mengkaji bahasa sebagai instrumen komunikasi adalah bagaimana kita mendapatkan padanan yang sesuai dalam Bahasa Indonesia sebagai bahasa sasaran, walaupun kita mengetahui sifat kedinamisan Bahasa Indonesia itu sendiri, dan seberapa kuatkah intensitas kekuatan perubahan/perkembangan teknologi untuk membuat manusia memproduksikan labelnya (bahasa). Ingat, kita bukanlah sekedar mahasiswa yang mempelajari bahasa sebagai komunikasi, tetapi juga aspek budaya yang secara keseluruhan memayungi unsur bahasa itu.

(Maret 2017)

The Forming of Culture - Free Translation of 1974 Koentjaraningrat's Anthology

CULTURE, MENTALITY, AND DEVELOPMENT

THE FORMING OF CULTURE

A free translation by Marsal Sintung

In my opinion, culture has at least three forms:

1. The form of culture as the whole thoughts, values, norms, rules, etc.

2. The form of culture as the whole activities and figured actions of humans in society.

3. The form of culture as the objects and creation of humans.

The first form above is the ideal one of culture which is abstract; cannot be felt or pictured. It exists only in minds of the humans in society where the culture lives. If they express it through writing, the existence of the ideal form of culture will be in the works by the people in the society as well. Moreover, ideal culture has been manifested through disks, tapes, archives, microfilm or microfiche, and so on.

Ideal culture may also called code of conduct, or in a familiar term, 'custom', whose function is to organize or to control the actions of humans in a society. Specifically, custom consists of several layers; from the most abstract to a limited, concrete one. The most abstract is culture value system, for example. The second one is the system of norms, then system of law which is based on norms. Meanwhile, specific rules of daily activities (like manners) are the concrete but limited in scopes.

The second form of culture is the social system, which consists of interacting human activities through times following certain schemes based on the code of conducts. As a sequence  of human activities through society, this is a concrete system which is observable, certifiable, and happens all the time.

The third one is called physical culture with lots of evidences. Since it was the whole results of activities and works of humans, physical culture is the most concrete form through identifiable objects; from big ones such as factories, temples, even to shirt buttons.

In a systematic analysis, the physical culture of a nation should be firstly categorized according to its level as I have mentioned in my first work of this series. We may resolve an element of culture to its sub-elements until simplest, smaller scopes. For example, physical aspect of religion as element of culture is ritual architecture or temple. Such big element may still be resolved into ritual appliances; to priest's vestment; until the smallest scope, clothes button.

These three forms of culture are inseparable in society. Ideal culture and customs organize also lead to actions and works of the human living in it which give physical culture as the result. In reverse, that (physical) culture forms certain livelihood which gradually separates humans and their natural environment, giving influences to their actions and mindsets.

For analytical purpose, it needs a precise, more detailed resolve. This is often forgotten not only in discussions or daily jobs, but also in scientific analysis of social scientists.

Throughout social and human sciences, there is already some kind of categorization on these three forms of culture above done by the scholars of literature and philology. The same goes on normative approaches of social sciences, such as customary law or even general law. The scholars dealing on behavioral sciences put their focus to the second form without leaving the ideal one (the first form). Likewise, the others in history and politics put theirs as well which at last, make the archaeologists seem to deal only on the third form although they (archaeologists) will finally refer to the first form as their background.

(August 2016)

What is the Real Content of Culture? - Free Translation of 1974 Koentjaraningrat's Anthology

CULTURE, MENTALITY, AND DEVELOPMENT

What is the Real Content of Culture?

A free translation by Marsal Sintung

Nowadays a lot of people like to discuss about the problems between culture and development, relation of ancient and modern culture, alteration of culture values, mentality development, national culture development, relation of beliefs and culture, and so on. In the discussion of study clubs, meetings of intellectuals, courses of employees, or even in interviews of reporters,  I often questioned the things I have mentioned above.

One of them which was often was like: "What exactly is covered within the concept of culture?". Many people interpret it in limited meaning, which is thought, work, and result of human fulfilling his desire of beauty. Briefly, it is all about art. Through the definition the concept of culture is still limited indeed.

On the contrary, several people, especially the social scientists, interpret the concept in an extremely broad sense which is the whole total of thought, work, and result of human not rooted to his instinct through the process of learning. Such concept is widely understandable since it covers almost all the activities of human in life. Things which are excluded in culture are several reflexes based on instinct while an action is actually a respond of instinct as well - for example, when people eat they will use tools, manners, and protocols. These phenomenons will be done after they learn the manner of eating.

Since the interpretation is that broad, for analytical purpose, culture shall be divided into several elements. The biggest element occurred for the first phase's division is called "universal element" which is exactly found in the cultures all over the world, from rural to complex, urban society as mentioned below:

1) System of religion/belief

2) System of social group/government

3) System of knowledge

4) Language

5) Art

6) System of economy

7) Technology

These elements may still be divided into sub elements each. They cover all the culture of humans in the whole world and show its scopes with the contents of the concept. They are deliberately ordered to describe which element is the hardest to change or to have intervention from mutual elements of other culture and which one is the easiest. But this is only an overview since occasionally sub-elements of an element may be hard to change than the one above it. For example, sub-elements of inheritance law (under the element of system of social group) is harder to change than sub-elements of temple architecture (under the element of  system of religion).

We hardly use the concept of culture with such a broad scope or the one used by social scientists in practice. If so, then Indonesia (as the country) might not need other government ministries since the Ministry of Education and Culture covers all the sectors of Indonesia's human life. Of course this will not ever happen, but then comes a new question: "If several sectors in lives of Indonesia people have become responsibility of various related ministries and institutions of the government, which sectors belong to the Ministry of Education and Culture?"

In reality, Ministry of Education and Culture covers only the art element. For development activities of other elements, such as science and languages, Indonesia has already several institutions; Indonesia Institute of Science dealing in sciences and The Language Development and Fostering Agency dealing in languages. Although these kinds of institutes are built, the Directorate of Culture still have to connect the art element to the others in a broader network in order to cover several examples of each elements. The aspect of economy and commercial from art which has to be developed by tourism, or the politics one for personal and national integration development, should be specially concerned by the directorate.

(July 2016)