Full

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
JOKE TRANSLATION STRATEGY AND

READER’S RESPONSE IN BAHASA INDONESIA
TRANSLATION OF DAVE’S TOP 15 FUNNIEST JOKES OF
THE FRINGE FESTIVAL 2017
AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra
in English Letters
By
RANGGA GILANG KUMARA
Student Number: 144214022
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS

FACULTY OF LETTERS
UNIVERSITAS SANATA DHARMA
YOGYAKARTA
2019
JOKE TRANSLATION STRATEGY AND

READER’S RESPONSE IN BAHASA INDONESIA
TRANSLATION OF DAVE’S TOP 15 FUNNIEST JOKES OF
THE FRINGE FESTIVAL 2017
AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra
in English Letters
By
RANGGA GILANG KUMARA
Student Number: 144214022
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS

FACULTY OF LETTERS
UNIVERSITAS SANATA DHARMA
YOGYAKARTA
2019
ii
Work like you’ll live forever,

live like you’ll die tomorrow
vii
For my family, who always pull me up

and push me forward
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, all praise to Allah the Almighty for blessing me with
chance, power and patience to write and finish this undergraduate thesis. Second,
there is not enough word to express my gratitude to my family, who always
support and push me. My mother and father, who support me with their unlimited
patience and trust. My brother, who encourage me with his attitude. My aunt, who
keep me focused with her constant reminder, and all members of my big family.
Third, I would like to express my gratitude to my thesis advisor, Harris
Hermansyah Setiajid, M. Hum, for all of his guidance and advice from the
beginning of the process of writing this undergraduate thesis. Fourth, I would like
to thank my co-advisor, Anna Fitriati, S.Pd., M. Hum., for her correction and
input to ensure that my thesis is understandable and presentable. Last, I want to
thank all of my friends who helped me pass through this stage of my life.
Rangga Gilang Kumara
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE............................................................................................... ii
APPROVAL PAGE..................................................................................... iii
ACCEPTANCE PAGE............................................................................... iv
PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH................................................................. v
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY........................................................... vi
MOTTO PAGE............................................................................................ vii
DEDICATION PAGE……………………………………………………. viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................ ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................ x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS …………………………………………… xiii
LIST OF CHARTS...................................................................................... xiv
LIST OF TABLES….………...................................................................... xv
ABSTRACT.................................................................................................. xvi
ABSTRAK.................................................................................................... xvii
CHAPTER I: Introduction......................................................................... 1
A. Background of Study.................................................................... 1
B. Problem of Formulation................................................................ 3
C. Objectives of the Study................................................................. 4
D. Definitions of Terms..................................................................... 4
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE........................................... 5

A. Review of Related Studies............................................................ 5
1. Aguado-Gimenez’s “Translation-Strategies Use: A Classroom
-Based Examination of Baker’s Taxonomy” (2005)................. 5
2. Xu’s “Translation Equivalence and Reader’s Response”
(2016)…………………………………………………...….… 6
3. Alexandrova’s “Linguistic Jokes Translation Strategies
and Methods” (2013)................................................................. 7
B. Review of Related Theories.......................................................... 8
1. Theories of Humor.................................................................... 8
2. Theories of Jokes Categorization.............................................. 8
3. Theories on Translation Strategies............................................ 12
4. Theories on Readers’ Response……………………………… 15
C. Theoretical Framework................................................................. 16
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY........................................................... 17

A. Areas of Research......................................................................... 17
B. Object of the Study........................................................................ 17
C. Method of the Study...................................................................... 18
D. Research Procedure....................................................................... 18
1. Types of Data............................................................................ 18
2. Data Collection.......................................................................... 19
3. Population and Sample.............................................................. 20
x
4. Data analysis..............................................................................20
CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS RESULT AND DISCUSSION.................... 22

A. The Comparison of Translation Strategy Applied for Each
Joke in Translating “Dave’s Jokes of the Fringe 2017”
into Bahasa Indonesia………………………….......................... 22
1. First Jokes.................................................................................. 25
2. Second Jokes…………………………………………………. 25
3. Third Jokes…………………………………………………… 26
4. Fourth Jokes………………………………………………….. 27
5. Fifth Jokes……………………………………………………. 27
6. Sixth Jokes……………………………………………………. 28
7. Seventh Jokes………………………………………………… 28
8. Eight Jokes…………………………………………………… 29
9. Ninth Jokes…………………………………………………… 30
10. Tenth Jokes………………………………………………….. 30
11. Eleventh Jokes………………………………………………. 31
12. Twelfth Jokes……………………………………………….. 32
13. Thirteenth Jokes…………………………………………….. 32
14. Fourteenth Jokes…………………………………………….. 33
15. Fifteenth Jokes………………………………………………. 34
B. The Joke Analysis and Reader’s Response of The Translated
Version of “Dave’s Jokes of The Fringe 2017”............................ 34
1. First Jokes.................................................................................. 35
2. Second Jokes…………………………………………………. 36
3. Third Jokes…………………………………………………… 36
4. Fourth Jokes………………………………………………….. 37
5. Fifth Jokes……………………………………………………. 38
6. Sixth Jokes……………………………………………………. 38
7. Seventh Jokes………………………………………………… 40
8. Eight Jokes…………………………………………………… 40
9. Ninth Jokes…………………………………………………… 41
10. Tenth Jokes………………………………………………….. 42
11. Eleventh Jokes………………………………………………. 43
12. Twelfth Jokes……………………………………………….. 44
13. Thirteenth Jokes…………………………………………….. 45
14. Fourteenth Jokes…………………………………………….. 45
15. Fifteenth Jokes………………………………………………. 46
C. The Connection between The Strategies Applied and The
Reader’s Response in “Dave’s Jokes of The Fringe 2017”……...47
1. Translation by More Neutral Words......................................... 47
2. Translation by Loan Words…..………………………………. 48
3. Translation by Cultural Substitutions………………………… 48
4. Translation by Paraphrasing with Unrelated Words…...…….. 48
5. Translation by Paraphrasing with Related Words……………. 48
6. Translation by Omission……..………………………………. 49
xi
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION...................................................................50
REFERENCES…......................................................................................... 52
APPENDICES.............................................................................................. 54
Appendix 1. ST and TT data.............................................................. 54
Appendix 2. Questionnaire Results ...................................................57
xii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
SL :Source Language
ST :Source Text
TL :Target Language
TT :Target Text
xiii
LIST OF CHARTS
No. Chart Page
1. Chart 1. TT1 Translation Strategies Distribution 23

2. Chart 2 . TT2 Translation Strategies Distribution 24
3. Chart 3 . Category Distribution 34
4. Chart 4. Reader’s Response Distribution by Strategy 47
xiv
LIST OF TABLES
No. Table Page
1. Table 1. Summary of One-liner Typology 9

2. Table 2. Baker’s (1992) Taxonomy of Translation
Strategies 13
3. Table 3. Example Data Coding 19
4. Table 4. Example of Questionnaire Question 20
5. Table 5. Example of Translation Strategies 21
xv
ABSTRACT
KUMARA, RANGGA GILANG. Joke Translation Strategy and Reader’s

Response in Bahasa Indonesia Translation of Dave’s Top 15 Funniest Jokes
Of The Fringe Festival 2017. Yogyakarta: Department of English Letters,
Faculty of Letters, Sanata Dharma University, 2019.
Humor, especially in the form of jokes is influenced by geographical

location, cultural background, age, personal experience and many more. This
unique sense of humor makes any form of humor, such as a joke, is limited to a
certain audience. This limitation creates a problem in translating humor from
English into Bahasa Indonesia. This situation intrigued the researcher to analyze
the strategies that the translator used and its effect on the readers. In this thesis,
the researcher used "Dave's Funniest Jokes of the Fringe 2017" as the source
material. "Dave's Joke of the Fringe" is an annual award held by Dave, an award-
winning UK entertainment channel, for the best one-liner in the Edinburgh
Festival Fringe.
There are two objectives in this research. The first objective is to analyze
the strategies used by translators in translating one-liner jokes from "Dave's
Funniest Jokes of the Fringe 2017". The second objective is to determine the
effect of the applied strategy to the response of the reader.
This undergraduate thesis is a qualitative research that applied library and
survey methods. The library method is applied in researching the theories for the
analysis of the data. The survey method is used to acquire data for analysis.
The result of this research shows that based on Baker’s taxonomy of
translation strategies, the translators most often apply the strategies of translation
by paraphrasing with related and unrelated words. The other strategies applied by
translators are translation by omission, translation by more neutral/less expressive
word, translation by loan word, and translation by cultural substitution. For the
reader, as long as the translated text has a clear, easy to follow set up and a twisty,
unpredictable, and/or contradictive punchline, the general readers can identify and
accept those sentences as joke sentences.
Keywords: Joke, Translation Strategy, Reader’s Response
xvi
ABSTRAK
KUMARA, RANGGA GILANG. Joke Translation Strategy and Reader’s

Response in Bahasa Indonesia Translation of Dave’s Top 15 Funniest Jokes
Of The Fringe Festival 2017. Yogyakarta: Jurusan Sastra Inggris, Fakultas
Sastra, Universitas Sanata Dharma, 2019.
Humor, terutama dalam bentuk lelucon, dipengaruhi oleh lokasi geografis,

latar belakang budaya, umur, pengalaman pribadi dan lain lain. Selera humor yang
unik ini membuat segala bentuk humor, seperti lelucon, memiliki audiensi yang
terbatas. Batasan ini menimbulkan masalah dalam menerjemahkan humor dari
Bahasa Inggris ke Bahasa Indonesia. Situasi ini membuat peneliti tertarik untuk
menganalisis strategi yang digunakan oleh penerjemah dan efeknya terhadap
pembaca hasil terjemahan. Dalam skripsi ini, peneliti menggunakan "Dave's
Funniest Jokes of the Fringe 2017" sebagai sumber. "Dave's Joke of the Fringe"
adalah penghargaan tahunan yang diselegarakan oleh Dave, kanal hiburan peraih
penghargaan di Britania Raya, untuk one-liner (lelucon pendek yang terdiri dari 1,
2 kalimat) di Edinburgh Festival Fringe.
Terdapat dua objektif dalam skripsi ini. Pertama, untuk menganalisis
strategi yang digunakan oleh penerjemah dalam menerjemahkan lelucon one-liner
dari "Dave's Funniest Jokes of the Fringe 2017". Kedua, untuk melihat efek dari
strategi yang digunakan terhadap tanggapan pembaca.
Skripsi ini ada penelitian kualitatif yang menggunakan metode studi
pustaka dan survei. Metode studi pustaka digunakan dalam menemukan teori
untuk menganalisa data. Metode survei digunakan untuk mendapatkan data yang
diperlukan untuk analisis.
Hasil penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa berdasarkan taksonomi strategi
penelitian dari Baker, para penerjemah paling sering menggunakan translation by
paraphrase with related and unrelated words. Strategi lain yang digunakan oleh
para penerjemah adalah translation by omission, translation by more neutral/less
expressive word, translation by loan word, dan translation by cultural
substitution. Bagi pembaca, selama teks terjemahan memiliki set up yang jelas
dan mudah diikuti, serta punchline yang tak terduga dan/atau bertolak belakang,
maka pembaca pada umumnya akan dapat mengidentifikasi dan menerima
kalimat-kalimat tersebut sebagai kalimat lelucon.
Kata Kunci: Lelucon, Strategi Penerjemahan, Tanggapan Pembaca
xvii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
Humor is an integral part of human social interaction. According to
Koestler (2016), humor can be defined as a type of stimulation that tends to elicit
laughter (para. 1). By eliciting laughter, humor creates a more amiable
environment for interactions. The type of stimulation that can create laughter is
different from one person to another. The ability to understand the stimulation and
then being stimulated by it is called a sense of humor. This sense of humor is
unique because it is influenced by geographical location, cultural background,
age, personal experience and many more.
Humor can exist in a lot of forms and one of those forms is joke. A joke is
a short piece of humorous story in which the humor culminates in the final part of
the story, called the punchline (Hetzron, 1991, pp. 65-66). The unique sense of
humor makes any form of humor, such as joke is limited to a certain audience. A
certain joke can only be understood by an audience with the same basic
understanding as the speaker of the joke. For example, this is a technology jokes
about binary codes, "there are 10 types of people in the world: those who
understand binary and those who don't". To understand this joke, someone needs
to have the same basic technical knowledge that 10 in binary code is 2 in decimal
number.
1
This limitation creates a problem in translating humor from English into
Bahasa Indonesia. It can be seen from the lack of bestseller comedy novel series
that have been translated into Bahasa Indonesia, such as Douglas Adams's The
Hitchhiker's Guide to The Galaxy and Terry Pratchett's Discworld. Another
example is a short joke, "I used to work in a shoe recycling company, it was sole-
destroying" (Alex Horne, 2013, The Fringe). The humor in this joke is based on
the homophone of the word "sole" with "soul" that can give the sentence double
meaning. When translated into Bahasa Indonesia, it is impossible to use the same
connection between "sole" and "soul" because in Indonesia, "sole" is sol and
"soul" is jiwa. This situation intrigued the researcher to find out in what way can
humor, especially in the form of jokes be translated from one language to another.
In this thesis, the researcher used "Dave's Funniest Jokes of the Fringe
2017" as the source material. "Dave's Joke of the Fringe" is an annual award held
by Dave, an award-winning UK entertainment channel. This is an award for the
best one-liner, a joke that completed in one sentence, in the Edinburgh Festival
Fringe. The Edinburgh Festival Fringe is the largest art festival in the world held
annually in August in Edinburgh, Scotland.
"Dave's Funniest Jokes of the Fringe 2017" is chosen as the source
material because the researcher tries to find a credible source of short jokes.
"Dave's Jokes of the Fringe" has been held annually for ten years. Every year, a
panel of foremost UK comedy critics chooses 15 best one-liners from every
comedy performance at The Edinburgh Festival Fringe that year. This 15 one-
liner will be voted by 2000 people anonymously without the voters knowing the
comedian who performs the jokes. The performer with the highest voted joke
received "Dave's Funniest Joke of the Fringe" award.
For the translated version, because there is no official translation available,
the researcher used several professional translators to translate the jokes into
Bahasa Indonesia. This translated version then will be analyzed to see what
strategies the translators choose to apply to translate each joke. The translation is
shown to several readers to get their opinion whether the translator managed to
translate the jokes into Bahasa Indonesia or not.
Through this undergraduate thesis, the researcher aims to understand the
strategies applied by translators to overcome the language and cultural barrier in
translating jokes from one language to another. This research is expected to be
able to help the reader, especially students of Universitas Sanata Dharma,
understand the difficulty in translating jokes and the solution to overcome it. The
researcher hopes that this thesis can help to further the discussion in the field of
joke translation and humor translation in general.
B. Problem Formulation
There are two problems that this undergraduate thesis tries to analyze. The
two problems are:
1. What strategies are applied to translate “Dave’s Funniest Jokes of the Fringe
2017” into Indonesian?
2. What is the effect of the applied strategies to the reader’s response of the
Indonesian translation of “Dave’s Funniest Jokes of the Fringe 2017”?

C. Objectives of the study
In accordance to the problem above, there are two objectives of this
research. The first objective is to analyze the strategies that the translator applied
in translating “Dave’s Funniest Jokes of the Fringe 2017” into Bahasa Indonesia
based on Baker’s Taxonomy of Translation Strategies. The second objective is to
determine the effect of the applied strategy to the response of the reader.
D. Definitions of terms
A Joke is a short piece of humorous story in which the humor culminates
in the final part of the story, called the punchline (Hetzron, 1991, pp. 65-66).
Translation Strategies in this study refer to strategies that the translator
used to overcome any problems in transferring messages from SL to TL.
According to Baker (1992), those strategies are translation by more general word,
translation by more neutral/less expressive word, translation by cultural
substitution, translation by loan word, translation by paraphrase using related
word, translation by paraphrase using unrelated word, translation by omission,
and translation by illustration (p.26-42).
Reader’s Response is the response that the readers have from reading
literary works that can be used as a data for this study based on reader-response
criticism, an approach which believed that the meaning of a text is derived from
the reader through the reading process (Cahill, 1996, pp. 89-97)
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
In this chapter, the researcher reviews and discusses several studies and
research done by other researchers in similar or closely related topic. The
researcher also reviews the theories used as the basis of this research. The related
studies are Aguado-Gimenez’s “Translation-Strategies Use: A Classroom-Based
Examination of Baker’s Taxonomy”, Xu’s “Translation Equivalence and Reader’s
Response”, and Alexandrova’s “Linguistic Jokes Translation Strategies and
Methods”. The researcher discusses each study to see its focus, highlight the
similarities, and elaborate on the distinction from this present study. The
researcher uses and synthesizes the theories reviewed in this chapter as the
theoretical framework to answer the problem of this research.
A. Review of Related Studies
1. Aguado-Gimenez’s “Translation-Strategies Use: A Classroom-Based
Examination of Baker’s Taxonomy” (2005).
This paper by Aguado-Gimenez is a study of the importance of teaching
translation strategies to students. The study analyzes the way students used
Baker’s taxonomy of translation strategy to help them overcome the translation
problem. In this study, Aguado-Gimenez creates an experiment by asking
undergraduate students to translate some selected Noun Phrase from English to
Spanish. He then examined and analyzed the result of the translation.
5
This study shows that undergraduate students did use the strategies from
Baker’s taxonomy to overcome any problem in translation. The results of this
study emphasize the importance of teaching practical theories to the students and
then to apply the theories in the classroom.
Aguado-Gimenez’s analysis and examination of translation strategies used
by the student can be used by the researcher as the basis and idea to analyze the
translation strategies that the translators use to translate jokes in this present
research.
2. Xu’s “Translation Equivalence and Reader’s Response” (2016).
Xu’s paper is a detailed analysis of determining the equivalence of a
translation through the reader’s response theory. In the study, Xu compares some
lines from “Ulysses” and two of its Chinese translation.
In this comparison, Xu shows how readers respond to different kinds of
translation. Xu then proposes an approach to equivalence where the translator
should consider the knowledge and context of the reader as a basis to find an
equivalent term, so that the message received by the reader is the same whether in
Source Language (SL) and Target Language (TL).
Xu’s analysis on the connection of equivalence and reader’s response can
be used by the researcher to analyze the reader’s response to a more specific area.
Which is the effect of the translated jokes to the reader, to see whether it can
preserve the form and purpose of the jokes.

3. Alexandrova’s “Linguistic Jokes Translation Strategies and Methods”
(2013).
In Alexandrova’s paper, it focuses on the translation strategies used in
translating linguistic jokes from English to Russian. In this paper, linguistic jokes
are divided into 3 main mechanisms, semantic, stylistic, and pragmatic
mechanism.
By compiling a corpus consisting of one thousand English and Russian
traditional linguistic jokes, Alexandrova comes to this certain conclusion: First,
jokes with a semantic mechanism are very difficult to translate, the translator
needs to use either literal translation with commentary, renditions, foreign
inclusion, adaptation, generalization or equivalence to at least explain the jokes to
the target audience. Second, jokes with a syntactic mechanism are easy to
translate and sometimes only need transpositions and grammatical agreements to
follow the norms of the target language. Third, the easiest linguistic jokes to
translate are the jokes based on pragmatic mechanism.
This study can be used by the researcher to help analyze the strategies that
the translator used to translate jokes. This study creates its own interpretation on
the strategy used by the translator, but the researcher study only focuses on the
Baker’s taxonomy of translation strategy. This study only researches linguistic
jokes while the researcher studies are not limited to linguistic jokes, but also other
mechanisms of jokes.
B. Review of Related Theories
1. Theories of Humor
Raskin (1985) “Script-based Semantic Theory of Humor” is a variant of
the Incongruity theory of humor. It focuses on verbal humor, which is a written
and spoken word used in narrative or riddle jokes concluding with a punch line.
According to Raskin (1985), there are two conditions to produce a verbal
joke:
a. The text is compatible, fully or in part, with two different scripts (p. 99).
b. The two scripts with which the text is compatible are opposite (p. 99).
The humor is created when the trigger or the punchline caused the reader to
change the understanding of the obvious script into the opposing script.
An example given by Raskin (1985) is as follow: "Is the doctor at home?"
The patient asked in his bronchial whisper. "No," the doctor's young and pretty
wife whispered in reply. "Come right in" (p. 100). For this example, the two
scripts contained in the joke are “a patient seeing a doctor” and “a lover seeing
their partner”. The obvious script created by the set-up is a patient with a possible
bronchial problem wants to see a doctor but the doctor is not available. The
punchline “come right in” created a shift of the understanding into the opposing
script of a patient having an affair with his doctor wife.
2. Theories of Jokes Categorization
Chauvin (2015) compiles list of the typology of one-liners based on
logical mechanisms (para. 39). The list is shown in the table as follows:
Table 1. Summary of One-liner Typology

Pun-based (words) (a) Puns, polysemy
(b) Puns, homonymy
(c) Puns, paronymy
(d) Puns, visual and formal
Set phrases (e) Set phrases: meaning of set phrases
(f) Indirect allusions to phrases / incomplete
phrases
Ambiguous syntax (g) Ambiguous syntax
Pragmatics / discourse-based (h) Implicatures, diverse cases
(i) Implicatures, indirect speech acts
(j) Discursive / conversational clichés
(k) Lexical, but reference
(l) Cultural references
Logical fallacies; observational (m) Internal contradictions (with example of
humor diseases)
(n) Observational humor: gnomic statements
(o) Absurdist humor: absurd, silly statements
To better understand each typology, one example and explanation for the
typology is given by Chauvin (2015) as follows:
a. Puns, polysemy: “I entered a swimming contest at the weekend. I won the
100m butterfly. What am I going to do with an insect that big?” (para. 10).
The word butterfly can mean a type of insect or one of the styles in
swimming.
b. Puns, homonymy:”I just saw a beautiful girl with a massive gut. What a
waist” (para. 12). What a waste is a set phrase to say something regretful, and
waist sound similar to waste.
c. Puns, paronymy: “11:59:59 a.m. is my favourite time of the day. It’s second
to noon” (para. 14). Noon sounds close to none and second to none mean that
there is nothing better than it.

10
d. Puns, visual and formal: “Why oh why don’t people poof read stuff before
they post it?” (para. 15). While the statement is complaining about the fact
that people often did not proof read their stuff, the statement itself contains
typo on the word “poof”.
e. Set phrases, different meaning: “The easiest way to add insult to injury is
when you’re signing somebody’s plaster cast” (para. 18). “Add insult to
injury” is a set phrase that means adding more misfortune upon a misfortune,
but in this sentence, it is interpreted literally by adding an insult to someone
who is injured.
f. Indirect allusions to phrases / incomplete phrases: “I eat an apple every day.
The wife’s a doctor” (para. 19). The proverb that said “an apple a day keeps
the doctor away” is broken in this statement because even though he eat an
apple every day, his wife is a doctor.
g. Ambiguous syntax: “Throwing acid is wrong, in some people’s eyes” (para.
20). The sentence can both mean “throwing acid is wrong for some people”,
or “throwing acid in peoples' eyes is wrong”.
h. Implicatures, diverse cases: “You know that look you get from women when
they want you? Nah, me neither” (para. 23). The phrase “you know that”
implied that the performer know and experienced that “look”. But in this
sentence, the performer didn’t know that “look”.

11
i. Implicatures, indirect speech act: “I saw a sign in a car park saying: “Thieves
want your satnav.” I thought, “Well, they can get lost!” (para. 26). The phrase
“they can get lost” can mean that the thieves will never get the satnav, or the
satnav is so useless that the thieves can get lost even if they use it.
j. Discursive / conversational clichés: “My girlfriend bought a cookbook the
other day called “Cheap and easy vegetarian cooking.” Which is perfect for
her, because not only is she a vegetarian…” (para. 27). Cheap and easy can
mean someone who is easy to please especially in a sexual context.
k. Lexical, but a reference: “A Chinese couple are in bed. The husband says “I
want a sixty-nine.” His wife says, “You want beef and broccoli now?” (para.
28). In Chinese restaurants, especially for delivery order, the customer only
needs to mention the number on the menu to order the food because they
have a lot of items on the menu.
l. Cultural references: “Maybe it’s Maybelline… and maybe it’s Photoshop.”
(para. 30). Maybe it’s Maybelline is a tagline for cosmetic brand Maybelline
that said when someone is looking good using their products or maybe they
just looks good because of Photoshop.
m. Internal contradictions: “I was thinking of writing a book, A Guide to Better
Shoplifting—but who the hell is going to buy it?” (para. 33). Only a
shoplifter who need a guide to better shoplifting and no shoplifter will buy
anything in the shop.

12
n. Observational humor: “If you’re trying to improve your memory, lend
someone money.” (para. 34). It is an unusual but true way to improve
memory, because people will always remember if they lend someone some
money.
o. Absurdist humor: “Apparently, 1 in 5 people in the world is Chinese. And
there are 5 people in my family, so it must be one of them. It’s either my
mum or my dad. Or my older brother Colin. Or my younger brother Ho-
Chan-Chu. But I think it’s Colin.” (para. 35). It is absurd that the statement 1
in 5 people is Chinese means that one of the performer family members must
be Chinese. It's even more absurd that actually the name of one of his family
members is Chinese and he did not realize it.
3. Theories on Translation Strategies
In this study, to analyze the translation of the jokes and the strategies used
by the translator, the researcher uses Mona Baker’s taxonomy on translation
strategies. The strategies are:

13
Table 2. Baker’s (1992) Taxonomy of Translation Strategies

A Translation by more general Related to propositional meaning. It works
word in most languages (p. 26)
B Translation by more neutral It has to do with differences in expressive

word meaning (p. 28)
C Translation by cultural Replacing a culture specific item with target

substitution language that does not have the same
meaning but have the same impact (p. 31)
D Translation using loan word Related with culture specific item, modern
loan words etc. (p. 34)
E Translation by paraphrases This is used when the concept expressed by

using related words the source item is lexicalized in the target
language, but in a different form, and when
the frequency of use in the source language
is higher than in the target language (p. 37)
F Translation by paraphrases This is used when the concept in the source

using unrelated words language is not lexicalized in the target
language (p. 38)
G Translation by omission Omission of words which are not vital to

development of text (p. 40)
H Translation by illustration Use of illustration when source words lack

equivalent (p. 42)
To better understand the translation strategies proposed by Baker, an
example for each type of strategy is given as follows:
a. Translation by more general word: “He sit on that stool” into Dia duduk di
kursi itu. In this translation, the word “stool”, which is a specific type of seat
furniture without back and armrest, is translated into a more general word
kursi.
14
b. Translation by more neutral/less expressive word: “She lives in that
humongous house” into Dia tinggal di rumah yang sangat besar itu. In this
translation, “she” contains a female gender expression while dia is a neutral
word without gender expression.
c. Translation by cultural substitution: “My favorite breakfast is bacon and
egg” into Sarapan pagi kesukaanku adalah bubur ayam. “Bacon and egg” is
a very common breakfast menu in the US, but it is largely unheard of in
Indonesia while bubur ayam is a common Indonesian breakfast menu.
d. Translation by loan word: “Mom’s spaghetti is the food I miss the most” into
Spaghetti ibuku adalah makanan yang paling aku rindukan. Rather than
translating or paraphrasing, the word “spaghetti” is kept and used as is.
e. Translation by paraphrase using related words: “I fixed my flat tire at the
roadside tire shop” into Aku memperbaiki ban kempes ku di tukang tambal
ban pinggir jalan. Rather than a tire shop, it is more common in Indonesia to
fix a flat tire at mechanic specialized in a flat tire.
f. Translation by paraphrase using unrelated words: “She usually comes home
for thanksgiving” into Dia biasanya pulang saat hari libur untuk
mensyukuri hasil panen di Amerika Serikat. In this translation, the
Indonesian translation explains the meaning of thanksgiving.
g. Translation by omission: “This is my old grandma favorite song” into Ini
adalah lagu favorit nenekku. The word “old” is omitted in the translation
because it is unnecessary as “grandma” is naturally old.

15
h. Translation by illustration: “I just ate a bowl of gumbo” into a picture of
gumbo. As gumbo is a unique food from the US, it is easier to use a picture
rather than explaining what gumbo is.
Baker’s taxonomy is very detailed and makes it easier to differentiate and
categorized the type of strategy that the translator used in overcoming problems of
translating words without equivalence.
4. Theories on Reader’s Response
Reader’s response theory is “based on reader-response criticism, an
approach which believed that the meaning of a text is derived from the reader
through the reading process (Cahill, 1996, pp. 89-97). According to Iser (1978),
“a literary text can only produce a response when it is read” (p. 1). This view puts
an emphasis on the reader as the source of validation of literary works. Based on
the theories above, the interpretation and meaning of literary works can be solely
based on the perspective of the reader rather than the intention of the author.
Nida (1964) mentioned the principle of equivalent effect, in which "the
relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as
that which existed between the original receptor and the message." (p. 159). In
this theory, Nida emphasizes that the important point of the translation is to
preserve the connection between the text and the reader. For example, a
melancholic and dramatic text in ST should have the same melancholic and
dramatic effect in TT even if the translation itself is not formally accurate.

16
C. Theoretical Framework
The script-based semantic theory of humor by Raskin is used to define the
jokes and identify its humor. The one-liner typology by Chauvin is then used as
the basis to analyze and categorize the jokes and its translation. Baker’s
Taxonomy of Translation Strategies is used to identify and analyze the strategies
that the translators used in translating the jokes from ST to TT. Cahill and Iser
view on reader response are used as the basis to question the connection between
the strategies used by the translator and the response from the reader. The analysis
itself is based on Nida’s view on the principle of equivalent effect, to see whether
the relation between reader and the target text is substantially the same with the
source text.
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
A. Areas of Research
The focus of this research is on the strategies that the translators used in
translating one-liner jokes from English into Bahasa Indonesia and whether those
strategies could preserve the form and the function of the jokes. Based on the
categories made by William’s The Map: A Beginner's Guide to Doing Research in
Translation Studies (2002), the area of research of this undergraduate thesis is text
analysis and translation, especially in the comparison of translation and their
source text. According to William (2002), the analysis of translated texts involves
the comparison of a translation with its original and it is not possible to deal with
every aspect, so there is a need to choose one particular aspect, for example, the
strategy that the translator used to solve a problem in translating (p. 6).
B. Object of the study
The objects of this research are 2 different Indonesian translations of
Dave's Top 15 Funniest Jokes of the Fringe Festival 2017. Dave's Top 15 Funniest
Jokes of the Fringe Festival 2017 is a collection of 15 best one-liner jokes from
Edinburgh Festival Fringe 2017 according to Dave, a British TV show. The
researcher used two Indonesian translations from two different professional
translators.
17
18
C. Method of the Study
This undergraduate thesis is a qualitative research using library and survey
method. According to George (2008) "library method involves identifying and
locating sources that provide factual information or personal/ expert opinion on a
research question; necessary component of every other research method at some
point" (p. 6) and the researcher used this method as the basis for theory
formulation, data analysis, and discussion. In addition, the survey method is used
to collect the data necessary for answering the problem discussed in this research.
D. Research Procedure
1. Types of Data
There are two types of data used in this research, objective and affective
data. The objective data used in this research are an English ST and two different
Bahasa Indonesia TT. The ST is taken from a web page entitled “Dave's Top 15
Funniest Jokes of the Fringe Festival 2017”. The ST taken for this research is the
15 one-liners listed on the page. The TT is its Indonesian translation from two
different groups of professional translators in Yogyakarta, Pemad and Quantum.
The affective data used in this research are the questionnaire results from
10 respondents answering 30 questions about the TT. The question asked is
“Menurut anda, apakah kalimat di bawah ini merupakan sebuah lelucon?” for
each joke in TT. For the respondents, the researcher asks 10 Indonesian university
students aged 18+ from the Literature Department of Universitas Sanata Dharma.
As adult university students, especially from the literature department, the

19
respondents have a general ability to understand and differentiate joke sentences
from other forms of sentences.
2. Data Collection
The researcher went through several processes to collect the data used in
this research. First, the researcher copied the data from the website into a
document file. Second, the researcher asked two professional to translate the data
into Indonesian. Third, the collected data were then coded and put into the table as
follows:
Table 3. Example Data Coding

No. Text
6/ST Combine Harvesters. And you'll have a really big restaurant.
6/TT Gabungkan semua Rumah Makan Sederhana. Dan kita akan
1 mendapatkan Rumah Makan Sangat Sederhana.
6/TT Kumpulkan mesin-mesin pemetik hasil panen. Dan kamu bisa punya
2 sebuah restoran yang sangat besar.
The code can be read as follows:
6: The number of the data
ST: Source text
TT1: Target text 1 (Pemad)
TT2: Target text 2 (Quantum)
Fourth, the researcher created a questionnaire in Indonesian to see the
effect of the translation with the example as follows:

20
Table 4. Example of Questionnaire Question

No Text Jawaban
Menurut anda, apakah kalimat di bawah ini merupakan Ya Tidak
sebuah lelucon?
1 Saya tidak suka koin pound yang baru, saya tidak suka
kembalian saya diubah.
2 Saya bukan penggemar uang koin pound yang baru,
karena saya memang tidak suka semua uang receh yang
berbentuk koin.
Fifth, the researcher asked 10 adults aged 18+ from the Literature
Department of Universitas Sanata Dharma to answer the questionnaire. Finally,
the result of the questionnaire was compiled into statistical data.
3. Population and Sample
For the objective data, there are 15 one-liners as the population of the
source text. There is no sample because the researcher used all the data in the
population. From those data, there are two different translations for each one-
liner. There are 30 one-liners in the translated text as the population.
For the affective data, the questionnaire asked one question for each one-
liner in the TT. So there are 30 answers for each questionnaire. As there are 10
people filled the questionnaire, there are 300 answers as the population of the
affective data. The researcher used all the data in the population for this research.
4. Data analysis
There were three steps that the researcher did to answer the problem in this
research. The first step was to analyze the strategies used by the translator for each
one-liner. The researcher used Baker’s classification of translation strategy.
The table below shows how the first step was done in order to classify the
translation strategy.
21
Table 5. Example of Translation Strategies

No. Text Strategy
1/ST I'm not a fan of the new pound coin, but then again, I
hate all change.
1/TT1 Saya tidak suka koin pound yang baru, saya tidak Paraphrasing
suka kembalian saya diubah. unrelated
1/TT2 Saya bukan penggemar uang koin pound yang baru, Omission
karena saya memang tidak suka semua uang receh
yang berbentuk koin.
It could be seen from the table above that each datum was categorized into
the strategy that the translator used. In the example above, TT1 paraphrased the
word “change” into kembalian saya diubah which contained both meanings of the
word, “coins of low denomination” and “different state of being”. In TT2, the
translator took a different approach by omitting the meaning of “change” as
“different state of being” and translate “change” into uang receh yang berbentuk
koin.
The second step was to determine the effect of the translation to the
reader's perception by using the questionnaire results. From the results, the
researcher analyzed whether the reader can identify the translation as one-liner
jokes. To further the analysis, the researcher categorized the one-liner based on
Chauvin’s typology of one-liners.
The third and last step was to combine the analysis of the objective and
affective data to see the connection between the strategies that the translator used
in translating one-liner to the perseverance of the function as perceived by the
reader.
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
There are three parts to discuss in this chapter. Those parts are the
translation strategy and the reader’s responses of the Indonesian translation of
“Dave Jokes of the Fringe 2017” and the connection between those two. The first
part analyze the translation strategy that will answer the first problem formulation.
The second parts discuss the reader’s response of the translated text to see the
effect of the translation to the Indonesian readers. The third part analyze the
connection between the two previous parts to answer the second problem
formulation.
A. The Comparison of Translation Strategy Applied for Each Joke in
Translating “Dave’s Jokes of the Fringe 2017” into Bahasa Indonesia
In this part, the researcher aims to see what strategies applied in translating
the jokes from “Dave’s Funniest Jokes of the Fringe 2017”. There are 15 data
from the English version and also 30 data from the Indonesian version.
The analysis shows what types of strategies are used based on Baker’s
theory. Baker proposes eight strategies namely translation by more general word
(superordinate), translation by neutral/less expressive word, translation by cultural
substitution, translation using a loan word or loan word plus explanation,
translation by paraphrase using a related word, translation by paraphrase using
22
23
unrelated words, translation by omission, and translation by illustration (1992, P.
26-42).
From the data, the first translator from Pemad applied translation by
neutral word, cultural substitution, loan word, paraphrasing using related word,
paraphrasing using unrelated word and omission. The percentage distribution can
be seen in this following chart:
Chart 1. TT1 Translation Strategies Distribution

T T 1 T R A N S L AT I O N S T R AT E G I E S D I S T R I B U T I O N
Neutral, 1, 6%
Omission, 3, 20%
Loan, 3, 20%
Cultural
Substitution, 1, 7%
Paraphrasing
Related, 4, 27%
Paraphrasing
Unrelated, 3, 20%
It can be seen from the chart above that the translator does not favor certain
strategy, but almost equally using several strategies. The strategies used is still
dependent on the ST.
In TT2, the translator applied the same strategies mentioned above except
cultural substitution. The distribution can be seen as follows:

24
Chart 2. TT2 Translation Strategies Distribution

T T 2 T R A N S L AT I O N S T R AT E G I E S D I S T R I B U T I O N
Omission, 3, 19% Neutral, 3, 19%
Loan, 1, 6%
Paraphrasing
Paraphrasing Unrelated, 3, 19%
Related, 6, 37%
From the chart above, the translator favors the strategies of translation by
paraphrasing with related words. The difference between applied strategies and
the translator’s choices are analyzed and discussed in each point below in this
section.
There are fifteen points discussed in this section, one for each joke in the
source material. Because the researcher used two different sources for the
Indonesian translation, the main point of this discussion is to analyze the
translation strategy used by those two sources and compare the similarity and
difference based on Baker’s strategy.

25
1. First Joke
No Text Strategy
1/ST I'm not a fan of the new pound coin, but then again, I
hate all change.
suka kembalian saya diubah. Unrelated
1/TT2 Saya bukan penggemar uang koin pound yang baru, Omission
In the ST, the word “change” can mean either “the substitution of one
thing to another” or “coins of low denomination”. These two meanings are crucial
as it is the punchline of the jokes. The two translators have a different approach to
translating this word.
The first translator chooses to paraphrase the word “change” into a phrase
that contains both meanings of the word. In TT1, the word “change” is translated
into kembalian saya diubah. In TT2, the translator takes a different approach by
directly omitting one meaning of the word. The translator only translates “change”
into uang receh yang berbentuk koin.
2. Second Joke
No Text Strategy
2/ST Trump's nothing like Hitler. There's no way he could
write a book.
2/TT1 Trump sama sekali tidak seperti Hitler. Tidak mungkin Neutral
dia bisa menulis buku.
2/TT2 Trump tidak sama seperti Hitler. Tidak mungkin dia bisa Neutral
menulis buku.
In the ST, the phrase “nothing like” is an informal expression which
means really unlike, and generally implies that one person is better than the
26
others. In the TT, both translators choose the same approach by using a more
neutral and less expressive phrase. Both paraphrase “nothing like” into sama
sekali tidak seperti and tidak sama seperti respectively. Although paraphrase
differently, there is no implied meaning that one person is better than others, only
emphasizing that they are very different.
3. Third Joke
No Text Strategy
3/ST I've given up asking rhetorical questions. What's the
point?
3/TT1 Saya sudah menyerah memberikan pertanyaan Paraphrasing
retorika. Apa gunanya? Unrelated
3/TT2 Saya tidak akan pernah lagi membuat pertanyaan Paraphrasing
retoris. Apa gunanya? Unrelated
In this sentence, both translators used paraphrasing to avoid using the
same basic word in the same sentence because “asking” and “question” can be
translated into menanyakan and pertanyaan that comes from the word tanya. In
TT1, the translator chooses to paraphrase the word “asking” into memberikan
which have a closer meaning “to give”. In TT2, the translator paraphrases the
phrase “given up” into tidak akan pernah lagi which have a closer meaning of
“never again”. The translator also paraphrases “asking” into membuat which has a
closer meaning to “making”.

27
4. Fourth Joke
No Text Strategy
4/ST I'm looking for the girl next door type. I'm just gonna
keep moving house till I find her.
4/TT1 Saya sedang mencari tipe gadis manis anak tetangga Paraphrasing
sebelah. Saya akan terus pindah rumah sampai saya Related
menemukannya.
4/TT2 Saya mencari gadis biasa. Saya akan terus pindah Paraphrasing
rumah sampai saya berhasil menemukannya. Related
In this translation, both TT1 and TT2 used paraphrase for the phrase “the
girl next door type”. In English, “the girl next door” is a “nice, ordinary and
familiar girl, usually a neighbor or childhood friend”. In TT1, the phrase is
translated into a more elaborate phrase tipe gadis manis anak tetangga sebelah
which means “the neighbor’s sweet daughter”. In TT2, the phrase is translated
into a simpler phrase gadis biasa, which mean “ordinary girl”.
5. Fifth Joke
No Text Strategy
5/ST I like to imagine the guy who invented the umbrella was
going to call it the 'brella'. But he hesitated.
5/TT1 Saya suka membayangkan bahwa sosok yang Loan
menciptakan payung atau umbrella sebetulnya hendak
menyebutnya ‘brella’, tapi lalu dia ragu-ragu.
5/TT2 Saya membayangkan orang yang menciptakan Loan
“umbrella” atau yang bahasa Indonesianya payung
sebenarnya akan menamainya “brella”. Tapi orang itu
ragu-ragu.
In TT1 and TT2, both translators choose to keep both “umbrella” and
“Brella” as a loan word then gives an explanation. Although there is an
Indonesian term for “umbrella”, which is payung, both translators choose to keep
28
the English word to preserve the connection between “umbrella” the second
loanword, “brella”.
6. Sixth Joke
No Text Strategy
6/ST Combine Harvesters. And you'll have a really big
restaurant.
6/TT1 Gabungkan semua Rumah Makan Sederhana. Dan kita Cultural
akan mendapatkan Rumah Makan Sangat Sederhana. substitution
6/TT2 Kumpulkan mesin-mesin pemetik hasil panen. Dan Omission
kamu bisa punya sebuah restoran yang sangat besar.
In the ST, the phrase “combine harvester” could have two meanings. The
first is literally “combining several restaurants named Harvester, a restaurant
chain in Britain”, and the second is “a machine to harvest crops in the field”. In
TT1, the translator chooses to take the meaning of Harvester as a chain restaurant
and substitute it with another chain restaurant in Indonesia, which is Rumah
Makan Sederhana. In TT2, the translator chooses to omit the meaning of
Harvester as a chain restaurant, and chooses to translate it only as “a corps
harvesting machine”.
7. Seventh Joke
No Text Strategy
7/ST I'm rubbish with names. It's not my fault, it's a
condition. There's a name for it...
7/TT1 Saya tidak bisa mengingat nama. Ini bukan keinginan Paraphrasing
saya, tapi memang ini suatu kelainan. Nama kelainan Unrelated
itu adalah…
7/TT2 Saya sampah yang punya nama. Bukan salah saya, Omission
tapi keadaan. Sampah itu punya nama….
29
In ST, rubbish is an expression that means “bad or not good at something”.
In TT1, this word is paraphrased into tidak bisa mengingat which mean “unable to
remember”. In TT2, the translator omits the meaning of the word rubbish as an
expression and choose to translate it literally into sampah which mean “garbage”.
8. Eighth Joke
No Text Strategy
8/ST I have two boys, 5 and 6. We're no good at naming
things in our house.
8/TT1 Saya punya 2 anak laki-laki, umur 5 dan 6. Kami Paraphrasing
kesulitan mengingat nama benda-benda di rumah. Related,
Omission
8/TT2 Saya punya dua anak laki-laki, 5 dan 6. Kami tidak Neutral
pandai menamai barang-barang di rumah kami.
In TT1, the translator paraphrases “no good at naming” into kesulitan
mengingat nama that means “difficulty in remembering names”. In ST, “5 and 6”
can be the age of the boys, but also can mean the name of the boys according to
the next sentence. In TT1, by paraphrasing “5 and 6” into umur 5 dan 6, the
translator omits the second meaning of “5 and 6”. In TT2 the translator uses a less
expressive words to translate “no good” into tidak pandai. “No good” is an
informal phrase of “not good” while tidak pandai is a formal form of informal
phrases such as gak pinter or gak jago.

30
9. Ninth Joke
No Text Strategy
9/ST I wasn't particularly close to my dad before he died...
which was lucky, because he trod on a land mine.
9/TT1 Saya tidak terlalu dekat dengan bapak saat beliau Paraphrasing
masih hidup… ya, untung saja, soalnya dia Related
menginjak bom ranjau.
9/TT2 Saya tidak begitu dekat dengan ayah saya sebelum Paraphrasing
beliau meninggal… untunglah, karena beliau Related
menginjak ranjau darat.
In ST, according to the next sentence, the phrase “before he died” actually
means “the moment’s right before he died”. In TT1, it is translated into saat
beliau masih hidup which mean “when he still alive”. In TT2 the translator
chooses to translate it into sebelum beliau meninggal. It has a closer and more
literal meaning with ST but unable to convey the meaning of “the moments right
before he died”.
10. Tenth Joke
No Text Strategy
10/ST Whenever someone says, 'I don't believe in
coincidences.' I say, 'Oh my God, me neither!'.
10/TT1 Ketika seseorang berkata, ‘Saya tidak percaya pada Omission
kebetulan.’ Saya berkata, ‘Ya Tuhan, saya juga
tidak!’.
10/TT2 Setiap kali ada yang bilang, ‘Saya tidak percaya Paraphrasing
dengan yang namanya kebetulan.’ Saya berkata, ‘Ya Related,
ampun, sama ya kita. Saya juga enggak tuh!’ Neutral
In TT1, the translator translates the word “whenever” which mean “at
whatever time” into ketika which mean simply “at what time”. In TT2. The
translator paraphrases “in coincidence” into dengan yang namanya kebetulan. The
translator used a lengthier sentence to elaborate the phrase. It can also be seen in
31
how the translator translates the phrase “me neither”. It translated into sama ya
kita, saya juga enggak tuh! which gives more elaboration to the word, neither and
its contradiction to the previous sentence. The translator also used a more neutral
phrase to translate “oh my God” by translating it into ya ampun and omitting the
word “God”.
11. Eleventh Joke
No Text Strategy
11/ST A friend tricked me into going to Wimbledon by
telling me it was a men's singles event.
11/TT1 Seorang teman berbohong agar saya mau ikut ke Loan
Wimbledon, dia bilang di sana ada men single’s,
acara pria single
11/TT2 Seorang teman mengerjai saya dan membuat saya Paraphrasing
datang ke acara Wimbledon. Katanya sih itu adalah Unrelated
acara permainan yang pemainnya para lelaki yang
tidak berpasangan.
In the phrase “men’s singles event” from ST, both translator of TT1 and
TT2 have a very different approach to translating those phrases. In TT1, the
translator chooses to keep the phrase “men single’s” and gives an explanation as
acara pria single. In TT2, the translator chooses to elaborate the meaning of
“men’s singles event” as acara permainan yang pemainnya para lelaki yang tidak
berpasangan.
32
12. Twelfth Joke
No Text Strategy
12/ST As a vegan, I think people who sell meat are
disgusting; but apparently people who sell fruit and
veg are grocer.
12/TT1 Sebagai seorang vegan, saya menganggap penjual Loan
daging itu menjijikkan; tapi sepertinya para penjual
buah dan sayuran adalah penjual grosir [lebih
menjijikkan] (“grocer” yang berarti penjual grosir
jika dibaca dalam Bahasa Inggris akan serupa
dengan kata “grosser” yang artinya lebih
menjijikkan).
12/TT2 Sebagai seorang vegetarian, saya menganggap Paraphrasing
orang-orang yang berjualan daging itu menjijikan, Related
tapi sepertinya mereka yang menjual buah dan
sayur adalah pemilik atau pegawai di toko
kelontong.
In TT1, although the translator translates the word “grocer” into penjual
grosir, the translator also gives an elaborate explanation to try to encompass all
the use and meaning of the word “grocer”. In TT2, the translator chooses to
translate “grocer” into pemilik atau pegawai di toko kelontong which is a more
literal translation but forego the connection between the word “grocer” and
“grosser”.
13. Thirteenth Joke
No Text Strategy
13/ST For me dying is a lot like going camping. I don't
want to do it.
13/TT1 Bagi saya sekarat itu sama seperti pergi berkemah. Omission
Saya sama sekali tidak mau.
13/TT2 Bagi saya, sekarat itu terdengar sangat mirip seperti Paraphrasing
pergi berkemah. Saya tidak mau melakukan itu. Related
33
In TT1, the translator omitted the phrase “to do it” by translating the
sentence “I don’t want to do it” into saya sama sekali tidak mau which only mean
“I really don’t want to”. In TT2, the translator chooses to paraphrase the phrase “a
lot like” into terdengar sangat mirip which have closer meaning to “sounds like”.
14. Fourteenth Joke
No Text Strategy
14/ST I wonder how many chameleons snuck onto the Ark.
14/TT1 Saya penasaran berapa banyak bunglon yang Paraphrasing
menyelinap ke dalam Bahtera. Related
14/TT2 Saya penasaran ada berapa banyak bunglon yang Paraphrasing
menyelinap naik ke Bahtera Nuh. Related
In TT1, the translator paraphrases the word “onto” into ke dalam which
have closer meaning to “into” but both can generally mean going inside
something. In TT2, the translator paraphrases the word “Ark” into Bahtera Nuh to
give more context and a specification of what the Ark is.
15. Fifteenth Joke
No Text Strategy
15/ST I went to a Pretenders gig. It was a tribute act.
15/TT1 Saya datang ke konsernya Pretenders. Yang naik Paraphrasing
pentas adalah band cover. Related
15/TT2 Saya pergi menonton konsernya the Pretenders Paraphrasing
kemarin. Seperti namanya, grup musik tersebut Unrelated
membawakan lagu-lagu milik band populer dan
tampil meniru band tersebut.
In TT1, the translator translates “a tribute act” into band cover which
usually what a tribute act is, a band covering another famous band as a tribute act.
In TT2, the translator paraphrases the entire sentence “It was a tribute act” into an
34
explanation of the connection between a tribute act and the meaning of the name
the Pretenders.
B. The Joke Analysis and Reader’s Response of The Translated Version of
“Dave’s Jokes of The Fringe 2017”.
In this part, the researcher tries to see the connection between how the
point of the jokes is translated and the reader’s reaction to that translation. To
better understand the jokes, and create a more accurate analysis, the researcher
categorized each joke into several categories from Chauvin’s topology of one-
liners. Those categories are puns, set phrases, ambiguous syntax, implicatures,
conversational clichés, lexical reference, cultural reference, internal contradiction,
observational and absurdist humor.
Based on the theory above, the categories of jokes in the ST are as follows:
puns, set phrases, implicatures, cultural reference, and internal contradiction. The
distribution of the categories can be seen in the chart below:
Chart 3. Category Distribution
CATEGORY DISTRIBUTION
Internal
Contradiction, 3,
20% Puns, 3, 20%
Set Phrases, 2,
13%
Cultural
References, 5, Implicatures, 2,
34% 13%
35
This section also applied the affective data gathered via a questionnaire to
see the readers’ response for each translated jokes. By dividing this section into 15
points, one for each joke, the researcher analyzed and discussed the correlation
between the ways the jokes are translated to the reaction of the reader.
1. First Joke
No Text Result
1/ST I'm not a fan of the new pound coin, but then again, I Puns
hate all change.
Menurut anda, apakah kalimat di bawah ini Ya Tidak
merupakan sebuah lelucon? (%) (%)
1/TT1 Saya tidak suka koin pound yang baru, saya tidak 30 70
suka kembalian saya diubah.
1/TT2 Saya bukan penggemar uang koin pound yang baru, 30 70
The ST is a pun joke that comes from the connection between the phrases
“the new pound coin” in the setup and the double meaning in the word “change”
in the punchline. The word “change” means either “the substitution of one thing to
another” which mean something new or “coins”. In TT1, the translator tries to
encompass both meanings of the word “change” by paraphrasing it into kembalian
saya dirubah which results in 70% of readers do not consider it as a joke. In TT2,
the translator omits the meaning of the word “change” as creating something new.
The difference in the translator’s choice does not change the response of the
readers as 70% still do not consider it as a joke.

36
2. Second Joke
No Text Result
2/ST Trump's nothing like Hitler. There's no way he could Cultural
write a book. References
2/TT1 Trump sama sekali tidak seperti Hitler. Tidak 40 60
mungkin dia bisa menulis buku.
2/TT2 Trump tidak sama seperti Hitler. Tidak mungkin dia 40 60
bisa menulis buku.
This joke is based on the cultural knowledge that Donald Trump, the 45th
president of the United States, and Adolf Hitler, the leader of Nazi Germany in
WW2, are considered as a very bad person. In ST, the set up “Trump’s nothing
like Hitler” gives an implicit expectation that Trump is better than or not as bad as
Hitler. But, the punchline shows that Hitler is better than Trump because he can
write a book. This set up is not translated fully into Bahasa Indonesia by both of
the translators, because they are unable to imply that Trump is better than Hitler.
This is results in only 40% of the readers consider both translations as jokes.
3. Third Joke
No Text Result
3/ST I've given up asking rhetorical questions. What's the Internal
point? Contradiction
3/TT1 Saya sudah menyerah memberikan pertanyaan 70 30
retorika. Apa gunanya?
3/TT2 Saya tidak akan pernah lagi membuat pertanyaan 60 40
retoris. Apa gunanya?
In this joke, humor is created by internal contradiction between the setup
and the punchline. The setup state that the writer will no longer ask a rhetorical
37
question, but then immediately followed by asking a rhetorical question in the
punchline. In TT, although the two translators used different phrases, the core
form of no longer asking a rhetorical question and immediately followed by a
rhetorical question is preserved. It can be seen from the data that the majority of
the readers still consider those sentences as jokes, 70% for TT1 and 60% for TT2.
4. Fourth Joke
No Text Result
4/ST I'm looking for the girl next door type. I'm just gonna Set Phrases
keep moving house till I find her.
4/TT1 Saya sedang mencari tipe gadis manis anak tetangga 70 30
sebelah. Saya akan terus pindah rumah sampai saya
menemukannya.
4/TT2 Saya mencari gadis biasa. Saya akan terus pindah 30 70
rumah sampai saya berhasil menemukannya.
The core of this joke is the connection between the set phrase “girl next
door” and “moving house”. Rather than use the figurative meaning of “the girl
next door” which is “a nice, ordinary girl”, the performer chooses to use the literal
meaning “a girl who lived next door” as a set up for the punchline. In TT1, the
translator chooses to keep the connection by translating “girl next door” into gadis
manis anak tetangga sebelah. The phrase tetangga sebelah works with the
punchline that he needs to pindah rumah to find one. In TT2, the translator
chooses to translate “girl next door” into gadis biasa and thus abandoning the
connection because gadis biasa cannot mean “a girl who lived next door”. This
results in only 30% of the readers consider TT2 as a joke while 70% of the readers
consider TT1 as a joke.

38
5. Fifth Joke
No Text Result
5/ST I like to imagine the guy who invented the umbrella Puns
was going to call it the 'brella'. But he hesitated.
5/TT1 Saya suka membayangkan bahwa sosok yang 90 10
menciptakan payung atau umbrella sebetulnya hendak
menyebutnya ‘brella’, tapi lalu dia ragu-ragu.
5/TT2 Saya membayangkan orang yang menciptakan 60 40
“umbrella” atau yang bahasa Indonesianya payung
sebenarnya akan menamainya “brella”. Tapi orang itu
ragu-ragu.
In this joke, the writer suggests that the word “umbrella” is a pun that
comes from the combination of the word “brella” and “um”, onomatopoeia that
uttered when someone is hesitating. To preserve the wordplay, both translators
keep the word “umbrella” and “brella”. The only difference is that in TT1, the
translator directly explains umbrella as payung while in TT2 the translator used
longer phrase yang bahasa Indonesianya payung. This small difference in
phrasing creates a difference in the reader's perception as 90% of the readers
consider TT1 as jokes while only 60% of the readers consider TT2 as jokes.
6. Sixth Joke
No Text Result
6/ST Combine Harvesters. And you'll have a really big Cultural
restaurant. References
6/TT1 Gabungkan semua Rumah Makan Sederhana. Dan 60 40
kita akan mendapatkan Rumah Makan Sangat
Sederhana.
6/TT2 Kumpulkan mesin-mesin pemetik hasil panen. Dan 40 60
kamu bisa punya sebuah restoran yang sangat besar.
39
The phrase “combine harvesters” generally mean “a machine to harvest
crops in the field”. But when “Harvesters” is interpreted as the name of a chain
restaurant in Britain, combining Harvesters create a really big restaurant. In TT1,
the translator chooses to substitute Harvester to a local chain restaurant Rumah
Makan Sederhana. Although losing the double meaning of the phrase “Combine
Harvester”, the translator can create another wordplay using the phrase Rumah
Makan Sangat Sederhana. In English, Rumah Makan Sederhana can be translated
into “Simple Restaurant” while Rumah Makan Sangat Sederhana can mean “Very
Simple Restaurant”. This creates an incongruity in a way that if you combine
something, you should be creating something, bigger, or grander, not something
simple. In this way, the translator changes the point of the jokes, but still manage
to create a joke with the same basic principle of wordplay based on the restaurant
names as a cultural reference.
The majority of readers, 60%, consider TT1 as a joke. In TT2, the
translator chooses to omit the meaning of Harvester as a chain restaurant by
translating it into mesin-mesin pemetik hasil panen. This translation removes the
connection between “Harvesters” and “restaurant” thus creating two sentences
without any connection. It can be seen from the data that only 40% of the readers
that consider this sentence as a joke.

40
7. Seventh Joke
No Text Result
7/ST I'm rubbish with names. It's not my fault, it's a Internal
condition. There's a name for it... Contradiction
7/TT1 Saya tidak bisa mengingat nama. Ini bukan 20 80
keinginan saya, tapi memang ini suatu kelainan.
Nama kelainan itu adalah…
7/TT2 Saya sampah yang punya nama. Bukan salah saya, 40 60
tapi keadaan. Sampah itu punya nama….
In ST, the internal contradiction of the writer's inability to recall the name
of his condition shortly after saying that he is bad with names creates the point of
the jokes. In TT1, the translator keeps the point of the jokes, but paraphrase it with
longer, more formal and more elaborate sentences. This results in 80% of reader
cannot consider TT1 as a joke. The translator of TT2 chooses to forego the
definition of “rubbish” as an expression and literally translate it into sampah. This
creates an absurd sentence Saya sampah yang punya nama. Surprisingly, 40% of
the readers consider this sentence as a joke.
8. Eighth Joke
No Text Result
8/ST I have two boys, 5 and 6. We're no good at naming Implicature
things in our house.
8/TT1 Saya punya 2 anak laki-laki, umur 5 dan 6. Kami 30 70
kesulitan mengingat nama benda-benda di rumah.
8/TT2 Saya punya dua anak laki-laki, 5 dan 6. Kami tidak 30 70
pandai menamai barang-barang di rumah kami.
41
In this joke, the connection between the phrase “5 and 6” and “no good at
naming things” create an implied meaning that either the writer did not name his
children, or he named his boys “five” and “six” respectively. In both TT, this
implied meaning is lost because of the way the translator paraphrased the
sentences. In TT1, by adding the word umur, it constricts the definition of 5 dan
6. The translator also paraphrases “no good” into kesulitan mengingat thus further
the disconnection between phrases. Furthermore, both in TT1 and TT2, the
translation of “things” is not working in Bahasa Indonesia because benda-benda
and barang-barang cannot refer to children. This results in 70% of the readers do
not consider both TT1 and TT2 as a joke sentence.
9. Ninth Joke
No Text Result
9/ST I wasn't particularly close to my dad before he died... Implicature
which was lucky, because he trod on a land mine.
9/TT1 Saya tidak terlalu dekat dengan bapak saat beliau 80 20
masih hidup… ya, untung saja, soalnya dia
9/TT2 Saya tidak begitu dekat dengan ayah saya sebelum 90 10
beliau meninggal… untunglah, karena beliau
menginjak ranjau darat.
Generally, not being close to someone's own father before he died is an
unfortunate thing, because they are unable to spend important time and memories
with their deceased father. The setup of this joke implied that unfortunate
condition, but the punchline broke that implication by saying that it was lucky.
The phrase “before he died” usually means in the father everyday life, but in this
joke, it means the moment when the father is dying because he trod on a land
42
mine and died. Both translators in the TT keep the form of the jokes with a slight
difference in paraphrasing a certain phrase. This results in the majority of the
readers consider both TT1 and TT2 as joke sentences, 80% for TT1 and 90% for
TT2.
10. Tenth Joke
No Text Result
10/ST Whenever someone says, 'I don't believe in Internal
coincidences.' I say, 'Oh my God, me neither!'. Contradiction
10/TT1 Ketika seseorang berkata, ‘Saya tidak percaya pada 40 60
kebetulan.’ Saya berkata, ‘Ya Tuhan, saya juga
tidak!’.
10/TT2 Setiap kali ada yang bilang, ‘Saya tidak percaya 60 40
dengan yang namanya kebetulan.’ Saya berkata,
‘Ya ampun, sama ya kita. Saya juga enggak tuh!’
In this joke, the writer contradict the statement of disbelieving in
coincidences by immediately stating a coincidence. Both TT1 and TT2 paraphrase
the sentence heavily. The only major difference between TT1 and TT2 is in TT2,
the translator elaborates more by using the phrase sama ya kita. This phrase
emphasizes the coincidence factor and thus results in 60% of the readers consider
TT2 as a joke sentence while only 40% of the readers consider TT1 as a joke
sentence.
43
11. Eleventh Joke
No Text Result
11/ST A friend tricked me into going to Wimbledon by Cultural
telling me it was a men's singles event. References
11/TT1 Seorang teman berbohong agar saya mau ikut ke 30 70
acara pria single
11/TT2 Seorang teman mengerjai saya dan membuat saya 40 60
datang ke acara Wimbledon. Katanya sih itu adalah
acara permainan yang pemainnya para lelaki yang
tidak berpasangan.
In this joke, the connection between “Wimbledon”, a world-famous tennis
event and double meaning of the phrase “men’s singles event”, which can mean
one of the events in tennis or an event for single men to find their date, create
wordplay that results in humor. In both TT1 and TT2, the translators unable to
translate this connection. In TT1, the translator chooses to keep the phrase “men’s
single” and give an explanation in Bahasa Indonesia while in TT2, the translator
paraphrase “men’s singles event” by elaborately explain it in Bahasa Indonesia.
Both approaches results in only 30% of the readers consider TT1 as a jokes
sentence and 40% consider TT2 as a joke sentence.

44
12. Twelfth Joke
No Text Result
12/ST As a vegan, I think people who sell meat are Puns
disgusting; but apparently people who sell fruit and
veg are grocer.
12/TT1 Sebagai seorang vegan, saya menganggap penjual 80 20
daging itu menjijikkan; tapi sepertinya para penjual
buah dan sayuran adalah penjual grosir [lebih
menjijikkan] (“grocer” yang berarti penjual grosir
jika dibaca dalam Bahasa Inggris akan serupa
dengan kata “grosser” yang artinya lebih
menjijikkan).
12/TT2 Sebagai seorang vegetarian, saya menganggap 30 70
orang-orang yang berjualan daging itu menjijikan,
tapi sepertinya mereka yang menjual buah dan sayur
adalah pemilik atau pegawai di toko kelontong.
In ST, the word “grocer” is a homophone to the word “grosser”. This
creates a pun that mean, although the meat seller is disgusting, fruit and vegetable
seller is way more disgusting. In TT1, the translator chooses to keep the
connection by giving an explanation between the homophone of the word
“grocer” and “grocer”. Although it broke the form of the jokes, this explanation
makes the reader able to understand the joke and results in 80% of the reader
consider TT1 as a joke sentence. In TT2, the translator chooses to paraphrase
“grocer” into pemilik atau pegawai toko kelontong. Without further elaboration,
this translation severs the connection between “grocer” and its homophone
“grosser”. This results in 70% of the reader did not consider TT2 as a joke
sentence.
45
13. Thirteenth Joke
No Text Result
13/ST For me dying is a lot like going camping. I don't Set Phrase
want to do it.
13/TT1 Bagi saya sekarat itu sama seperti pergi berkemah. 30 70
Saya sama sekali tidak mau.
13/TT2 Bagi saya, sekarat itu terdengar sangat mirip seperti 30 70
pergi berkemah. Saya tidak mau melakukan itu.
In ST, the set phrase “dying is a lot like going camping” implied that
dying is not something to be feared of because it is simple and easy. The writer
broke this implication by stating the only reason he considers dying is the same as
camping is because he considers both things as troublesome and hard so he does
not want to experience it. In TT1 and TT2, the implied meaning of “a lot like
going camping” is not translated into Bahasa Indonesia. This results in 70% of the
readers did not consider TT1 and TT2 as jokes sentences.
14. Fourteenth Joke
No Text Result
14/ST I wonder how many chameleons snuck onto the Ark. Cultural
Reference
14/TT1 Saya penasaran berapa banyak bunglon yang 60 40
menyelinap ke dalam Bahtera.
14/TT2 Saya penasaran ada berapa banyak bunglon yang 80 20
menyelinap naik ke Bahtera Nuh.
It is a well-known cultural fact that Noah’s Ark only allows a couple of
each species on board. In this joke, the writer suggests that it’s possible for
chameleons to sneak onto the Ark because they can camouflage. Both TT1 and
46
TT2 stay true in translating from ST, they keep the form and connection. The only
difference is that in TT2, the translator elaborates on the meaning of “Ark” into
Bahtera Nuh to give more context in the sentence. This results in 80% of the
readers consider TT2 as a joke sentence while only 60% for TT1.
15. Fifteenth Joke
No Text Result
15/ST I went to a Pretenders gig. It was a tribute act. Cultural
References
15/TT1 Saya datang ke konsernya Pretenders. Yang naik 70 30
pentas adalah band cover.
15/TT2 Saya pergi menonton konsernya the Pretenders 70 30
kemarin. Seperti namanya, grup musik tersebut
The Pretenders is a famous English band, while the name itself means
“one who pretend”. The name is in connection with the phrase “tribute act” which
can mean a show performed by mimicking certain singer or band as a tribute to
those bands or singer. Both TT1 and TT2 try to preserve the connection between
“The Pretenders” and “tribute act” by paraphrasing it into a different form. In
TT1, “tribute act” is translated into band cover which have a close meaning. In
TT2, the translator chooses to explain the literal meaning of “The Pretenders” as a
proper name for the tribute band. Both approaches managed to make 70% of the
readers consider TT1 and TT2 as jokes sentences.

47
C. The Connection Between The Strategies Applied and The Reader’s
Response in “Dave’s Jokes of The Fringe 2017”.
In this part, the researcher analyze the connection between the strategies that
the translator used and the reader’s response. The researcher discuss six points in
this part, one for each strategy that both translators used in this study. To help the
analysis, the researcher categorize the data from questionnaire into each strategy
as can be seen in the chart below:
Chart 4. Reader’s Response Distribution by Strategy

READER'S RESPONSE DISTRIBUTION BY STRATEGY
100%
90%
80% 35 40 43
57 52
70% 63
60%
50%
40%
30% 65 60 57
43 48
20% 37
10%
0%
Neutral, 4 Loan, 4 Cultural Paraphrasing Paraphrasing Omission, 6
Substitution, 1 Unrelated, 6 Related, 11
Yes No
1. Translation by More Neutral Words
From the chart 4, only 43% of the readers consider the 4 sentences using
translation by more neutral words as joke sentences. From the analysis in part B.2,
this strategy cannot translate the implied meaning of ST and resulted in only the
minority of the readers consider the sentences translated with this strategy as joke
sentences.
48
2. Translation by Loan Words
In translation by loan words, 65% of the readers consider the 4 sentences
as joke sentences. From the data shown in previous parts, the translator’s choice to
loan the words rather than translating it in to Indonesian managed to keep the
form of the joke sentences intact. Only in datum no. 11/TT2 that the majority of
the readers do not consider the sentence as a joke sentence. This result comes
from the inability of the translator to translate the cultural reference in the ST.
3. Translation by Cultural Substitutions
There is only datum no. 6/TT1 that used cultural substitution as the
translation strategy. From the analysis in part B.6, the use of cultural substitution
in TT1 gives the readers a better understanding of the ST than the omission used
in TT2.
4. Translation by Paraphrasing with Unrelated Words
In the chart 4 above, only 48% of the readers consider the 6 sentences that
use translation by paraphrasing with unrelated words as jokes sentences. From the
analysis in the previous part, the translator choice to explain certain part of the
joke sentences make the majority of the readers cannot consider the TT as joke
sentences because the TT lost the concise and to the point form of ST.
5. Translation by Paraphrasing with Related Words
From the 11 sentences that use translation by paraphrasing with related
words, 57% of the readers consider them as joke sentences. From the analysis in
part B, the translators generally manage to keep the form of the jokes by using
paraphrasing with related words. But in part B.4, the readers respond differently
49
for TT1 and TT2 although both translator use paraphrasing with related words.
This result comes from the translator choice of words that either keep or break the
form of the joke.
6. Translation by Omission
In translation by omission, only 37% of the readers consider the 6
sentences as joke sentences. By omitting certain parts of the source text, the
translator break the form of the jokes. This choice made the readers unable to
consider the sentences as joke sentences.

CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION
From the analysis in the previous chapter, the most used strategy is the
translation by paraphrasing, whether using related or unrelated words. The
translator of TT1 uses paraphrasing with related word 4 times and paraphrasing
with unrelated word 3 times, 47% of the whole strategies distribution. In TT2, the
translator uses paraphrasing with related words 6 times and unrelated words 3 times,
56% of the whole distribution. Both translators prefer to paraphrase certain words
or phrases that difficult to translate, or could create oddity and ambiguity if
translated literally into TT. The least used strategy is the translation by cultural
substitution. It is used only once in TT1 and none in TT2. This strategy is rarely
used because it is limited by the translator’s knowledge. The translators have to
understand a specific concept in both ST and TT that have a similar or closely
related meaning, but only available in the ST and TT culture.
For the jokes that are based on wordplay and double meaning of certain
words or phrases, both translators choose to either loan the words and give an
explanation, paraphrase the words to give an explanation, or omit one of the
meaning entirely. The last strategy, translation by neutral words, is applied in
translating certain set phrases that have implied meaning into its more literal and
neutral phrase.
Based on the data in the previous chapters, a person's perception of a joke
sentence is varied between one individual to another. In translating pun-based jokes,
50
51
it is harder for the jokes to be accepted unless there is enough explanation or
keeping the loan word to make the jokes understandable. For jokes based on set
phrases, the readers are unable to consider the sentence as jokes because the implied
meaning of the set phrase is untranslatable. In cultural reference based jokes, unless
the reader understands the cultural reference or the translator managed to explain
or substitute the reference, the readers don’t consider the sentence as jokes. In
implicature and internal contradiction based jokes, as long as the translator manages
to translate the jokes in a short, to the point manner, the reader can accept those
sentences as the joke sentences.
In conclusion, translation by paraphrasing with related words is used the
most and translation by cultural substitution is used the least by the translators. The
resulted translated texts that manage to have a clear, easy to follow set up and a
twisty, unpredictable, and/or contradictive punchline, is identified and accepted as
joke sentences by the majority of the readers.

REFERENCES
Aguado-Giménez, P. & Pérez-Paredes, P. (2005). Translation-Strategies Use: A

Classroom-Based Examination of Baker’s Taxonomy. Meta, 50(1), 294–311.
https://doi.org/10.7202/010675ar.
Alexandrova, Elena & Narcisa Schwarz. (2013). Linguistic Jokes Translation

Strategies and Methods. Studii de Stiinta si Cultura, (9)2, 157.
Baker, Mona. (1992). In Other Words: A Coursebook of Translation. London:

Routledge.
Cahill, M. (1996). Reader-Response Criticism and the Allegorizing Reader.

Theological Studies, 57 (1), 89–96.
https://doi.org/10.1177/004056399605700105.
Chauvin, Catherine. (2015). One-liners and Linguistics: (re)Interpretation, Context

and Meaning. Brevity is the Soul of Wit. Retrieved from
http://angles.saesfrance.org/index.php/players/lodel/lodel/index.php?id=17.
Dave's Funniest Joke of the Fringe 2013. (2013). UKTV Corporate Site. Retrieved
from https://corporate.uktv.co.uk/news/article/daves-funniest-joke-fringe-
2013/.
Dave's Joke of the Fringe 2017. (2017). UKTV Corporate Site. Retrieved from
https://corporate.uktv.co.uk/news/article/daves-joke-fringe-2017/
George, Mary W. (2008). The Elements of Library Research: What Every Student
Needs to Know. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hetzron, Robert. (1991). On the Structure of Punchlines. Humor: International

Journal of Humor Research, 4(1), 61–108.
doi:10.1515/humr.1991.4.1.61.
Iser, Wolfgang. (1978). The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response.

Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Koestler, Arthur. (2016). Humour. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved from

https://www.britannica.com/topic/humor.
Nida, E. A. (1964). Towards a Science of Translating: With Special Reference to

Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating. Leiden: Brill.
Raskin, Victor. (1985). Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Lancaster: D. Reidel.
52
53
William, Jenny & Andrew Chesterman. (2002). The Map: A Beginner’s Guide to
Doing Research in Translation Studies. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing
Xu, Zhen. (2016). Translation Equivalence and the Reader's Response.

International Review of Social Sciences and Humanities, 10, 98-109.
54
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1. ST and TT Data
Strategy and
No. Text Joke
Category
1/ST I'm not a fan of the new pound coin, but then Puns
again, I hate all change.
suka kembalian saya diubah. Unrelated
1/TT2 Saya bukan penggemar uang koin pound yang Omission
baru, karena saya memang tidak suka semua
uang receh yang berbentuk koin.
2/ST Trump's nothing like Hitler. There's no way he Cultural

could write a book. References
2/TT1 Trump sama sekali tidak seperti Hitler. Tidak Neutral
2/TT2 Trump tidak sama seperti Hitler. Tidak mungkin Neutral
3/ST I've given up asking rhetorical questions. What's Internal

the point? Contradiction
3/TT1 Saya sudah menyerah memberikan pertanyaan Paraphrasing
retorika. Apa gunanya? Unrelated
3/TT2 Saya tidak akan pernah lagi membuat pertanyaan Paraphrasing
retoris. Apa gunanya? Unrelated
4/ST I'm looking for the girl next door type. I'm just Set Phrases
gonna keep moving house till I find her.
4/TT1 Saya sedang mencari tipe gadis manis anak Paraphrasing
tetangga sebelah. Saya akan terus pindah rumah Related
sampai saya menemukannya.
4/TT2 Saya mencari gadis biasa. Saya akan terus pindah Paraphrasing
rumah sampai saya berhasil menemukannya. Related
5/ST I like to imagine the guy who invented the Puns

umbrella was going to call it the 'brella'. But he
hesitated.
5/TT1 Saya suka membayangkan bahwa sosok yang Loan
menciptakan payung atau umbrella sebetulnya
55
hendak menyebutnya ‘brella’, tapi lalu dia ragu-

ragu.
5/TT2 Saya membayangkan orang yang menciptakan Loan
“umbrella” atau yang bahasa Indonesianya
payung sebenarnya akan menamainya “brella”.
Tapi orang itu ragu-ragu.
6/ST Combine Harvesters. And you'll have a really big Cultural

restaurant. References
6/TT1 Gabungkan semua Rumah Makan Sederhana. Cultural
Dan kita akan mendapatkan Rumah Makan substitution
Sangat Sederhana.
6/TT2 Kumpulkan mesin-mesin pemetik hasil panen. Omission
Dan kamu bisa punya sebuah restoran yang
sangat besar.
7/ST I'm rubbish with names. It's not my fault, it's a Internal
condition. There's a name for it... Contradiction
7/TT1 Saya tidak bisa mengingat nama. Ini bukan Paraphrasing
keinginan saya, tapi memang ini suatu kelainan. Unrelated
7/TT2 Saya sampah yang punya nama. Bukan salah Omission
saya, tapi keadaan. Sampah itu punya nama….
8/ST I have two boys, 5 and 6. We're no good at Implicature

naming things in our house.
8/TT1 Saya punya 2 anak laki-laki, umur 5 dan 6. Kami Paraphrasing
kesulitan mengingat nama benda-benda di Related,
rumah. Omission
8/TT2 Saya punya dua anak laki-laki, 5 dan 6. Kami Neutral
tidak pandai menamai barang-barang di rumah
kami.
9/ST I wasn't particularly close to my dad before he Implicature

died... which was lucky, because he trod on a
land mine.
9/TT1 Saya tidak terlalu dekat dengan bapak saat beliau Paraphrasing
masih hidup… ya, untung saja, soalnya dia Related
9/TT2 Saya tidak begitu dekat dengan ayah saya Paraphrasing
sebelum beliau meninggal… untunglah, karena Related
beliau menginjak ranjau darat.
56
10/ST Whenever someone says, 'I don't believe in Internal

coincidences.' I say, 'Oh my God, me neither!'. Contradiction
10/TT1 Ketika seseorang berkata, ‘Saya tidak percaya Omission
pada kebetulan.’ Saya berkata, ‘Ya Tuhan, saya
juga tidak!’.
10/TT2 Setiap kali ada yang bilang, ‘Saya tidak percaya Paraphrasing
dengan yang namanya kebetulan.’ Saya berkata, Related,
‘Ya ampun, sama ya kita. Saya juga enggak tuh!’ Neutral
11/ST A friend tricked me into going to Wimbledon by Cultural

telling me it was a men's singles event. References
11/TT1 Seorang teman berbohong agar saya mau ikut ke Loan
acara pria single
11/TT2 Seorang teman mengerjai saya dan membuat Paraphrasing
saya datang ke acara Wimbledon. Katanya sih itu Unrelated
adalah acara permainan yang pemainnya para
lelaki yang tidak berpasangan.
12/ST As a vegan, I think people who sell meat are Puns

disgusting; but apparently people who sell fruit
and veg are grocer.
12/TT1 Sebagai seorang vegan, saya menganggap Loan
penjual daging itu menjijikkan; tapi sepertinya
para penjual buah dan sayuran adalah penjual
grosir [lebih menjijikkan] (“grocer” yang berarti
penjual grosir jika dibaca dalam Bahasa Inggris
akan serupa dengan kata “grosser” yang artinya
lebih menjijikkan).
12/TT2 Sebagai seorang vegetarian, saya menganggap Paraphrasing
orang-orang yang berjualan daging itu Related
menjijikan, tapi sepertinya mereka yang menjual
buah dan sayur adalah pemilik atau pegawai di
toko kelontong.
13/ST For me dying is a lot like going camping. I don't Set Phrases
want to do it.
13/TT1 Bagi saya sekarat itu sama seperti pergi Omission
berkemah. Saya sama sekali tidak mau.
13/TT2 Bagi saya, sekarat itu terdengar sangat mirip Paraphrasing
seperti pergi berkemah. Saya tidak mau Related
melakukan itu.
57
14/ST I wonder how many chameleons snuck onto the Cultural

Ark. Reference
14/TT1 Saya penasaran berapa banyak bunglon yang Paraphrasing
menyelinap ke dalam Bahtera. Related
14/TT2 Saya penasaran ada berapa banyak bunglon yang Paraphrasing
menyelinap naik ke Bahtera Nuh. Related
15/ST I went to a Pretenders gig. It was a tribute act. Cultural

References
15/TT1 Saya datang ke konsernya Pretenders. Yang naik Paraphrasing
pentas adalah band cover. Related
15/TT2 Saya pergi menonton konsernya the Pretenders Paraphrasing
kemarin. Seperti namanya, grup musik tersebut Unrelated
APPENDIX 2. Questionnaire Results
Answer
No. Text & Question Ya Tidak
(%) (%)
Menurut anda, apakah kalimat di bawah ini
merupakan sebuah lelucon?
1/TT1 Saya tidak suka koin pound yang baru, saya tidak 30 70
suka kembalian saya diubah.
1/TT2 Saya bukan penggemar uang koin pound yang 30 70
baru, karena saya memang tidak suka semua
uang receh yang berbentuk koin.

2/TT1 Trump sama sekali tidak seperti Hitler. Tidak 40 60
2/TT2 Trump tidak sama seperti Hitler. Tidak mungkin 40 60

3/TT1 Saya sudah menyerah memberikan pertanyaan 70 30
retorika. Apa gunanya?
3/TT2 Saya tidak akan pernah lagi membuat pertanyaan 60 40
retoris. Apa gunanya?
58

4/TT1 Saya sedang mencari tipe gadis manis anak 70 30
tetangga sebelah. Saya akan terus pindah rumah
sampai saya menemukannya.
4/TT2 Saya mencari gadis biasa. Saya akan terus pindah 30 70
rumah sampai saya berhasil menemukannya.

5/TT1 Saya suka membayangkan bahwa sosok yang 90 10
menciptakan payung atau umbrella sebetulnya
hendak menyebutnya ‘brella’, tapi lalu dia ragu-
ragu.
5/TT2 Saya membayangkan orang yang menciptakan 60 40
“umbrella” atau yang bahasa Indonesianya
payung sebenarnya akan menamainya “brella”.
Tapi orang itu ragu-ragu.

6/TT1 Gabungkan semua Rumah Makan Sederhana. 60 40
Dan kita akan mendapatkan Rumah Makan
Sangat Sederhana.
6/TT2 Kumpulkan mesin-mesin pemetik hasil panen. 40 60
Dan kamu bisa punya sebuah restoran yang
sangat besar.

7/TT1 Saya tidak bisa mengingat nama. Ini bukan 20 80
keinginan saya, tapi memang ini suatu kelainan.
7/TT2 Saya sampah yang punya nama. Bukan salah 40 60
saya, tapi keadaan. Sampah itu punya nama….

8/TT1 Saya punya 2 anak laki-laki, umur 5 dan 6. Kami 30 70
kesulitan mengingat nama benda-benda di
rumah.
8/TT2 Saya punya dua anak laki-laki, 5 dan 6. Kami 30 70
tidak pandai menamai barang-barang di rumah
kami.
59

9/TT1 Saya tidak terlalu dekat dengan bapak saat beliau 80 20
masih hidup… ya, untung saja, soalnya dia
9/TT2 Saya tidak begitu dekat dengan ayah saya 90 10
sebelum beliau meninggal… untunglah, karena
beliau menginjak ranjau darat.

10/TT1 Ketika seseorang berkata, ‘Saya tidak percaya 40 60
pada kebetulan.’ Saya berkata, ‘Ya Tuhan, saya
juga tidak!’.
10/TT2 Setiap kali ada yang bilang, ‘Saya tidak percaya 60 40
dengan yang namanya kebetulan.’ Saya berkata,
‘Ya ampun, sama ya kita. Saya juga enggak tuh!’

11/TT1 Seorang teman berbohong agar saya mau ikut ke 30 70
acara pria single
11/TT2 Seorang teman mengerjai saya dan membuat 40 60
saya datang ke acara Wimbledon. Katanya sih itu
adalah acara permainan yang pemainnya para
lelaki yang tidak berpasangan.

12/TT1 Sebagai seorang vegan, saya menganggap 80 20
penjual daging itu menjijikkan; tapi sepertinya
para penjual buah dan sayuran adalah penjual
grosir [lebih menjijikkan] (“grocer” yang berarti
penjual grosir jika dibaca dalam Bahasa Inggris
akan serupa dengan kata “grosser” yang artinya
lebih menjijikkan).
12/TT2 Sebagai seorang vegetarian, saya menganggap 30 70
orang-orang yang berjualan daging itu
menjijikan, tapi sepertinya mereka yang menjual
buah dan sayur adalah pemilik atau pegawai di
toko kelontong.
60

13/TT1 Bagi saya sekarat itu sama seperti pergi 30 70
berkemah. Saya sama sekali tidak mau.
13/TT2 Bagi saya, sekarat itu terdengar sangat mirip 30 70
seperti pergi berkemah. Saya tidak mau
melakukan itu.

14/TT1 Saya penasaran berapa banyak bunglon yang 60 40
menyelinap ke dalam Bahtera.
14/TT2 Saya penasaran ada berapa banyak bunglon yang 80 20
menyelinap naik ke Bahtera Nuh.

15/TT1 Saya datang ke konsernya Pretenders. Yang naik 70 30
pentas adalah band cover.
15/TT2 Saya pergi menonton konsernya the Pretenders 70 30
kemarin. Seperti namanya, grup musik tersebut

Full

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

JOKE TRANSLATION STRATEGY AND

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS

JOKE TRANSLATION STRATEGY AND

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS

Work like you’ll live forever,

For my family, who always pull me up

there is not enough word to express my gratitude to my family, who always

Third, I would like to express my gratitude to my thesis advisor, Harris

input to ensure that my thesis is understandable and presentable. Last, I want to

Rangga Gilang Kumara

CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE........................................... 5

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY........................................................... 17

CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS RESULT AND DISCUSSION.................... 22

No. Chart Page

1. Chart 1. TT1 Translation Strategies Distribution 23

No. Table Page

1. Table 1. Summary of One-liner Typology 9

KUMARA, RANGGA GILANG. Joke Translation Strategy and Reader’s

Humor, especially in the form of jokes is influenced by geographical

Keywords: Joke, Translation Strategy, Reader’s Response

KUMARA, RANGGA GILANG. Joke Translation Strategy and Reader’s

Humor, terutama dalam bentuk lelucon, dipengaruhi oleh lokasi geografis,

Kata Kunci: Lelucon, Strategi Penerjemahan, Tanggapan Pembaca

A. Background of the Study

Humor is an integral part of human social interaction. According to

laughter (para. 1). By eliciting laughter, humor creates a more amiable

then being stimulated by it is called a sense of humor. This sense of humor is

unique because it is influenced by geographical location, cultural background,

age, personal experience and many more.

This limitation creates a problem in translating humor from English into

Hitchhiker's Guide to The Galaxy and Terry Pratchett's Discworld. Another

by Dave, an award-winning UK entertainment channel. This is an award for the

annually in August in Edinburgh, Scotland.

"Dave's Funniest Jokes of the Fringe 2017" is chosen as the source

panel of foremost UK comedy critics chooses 15 best one-liners from every

received "Dave's Funniest Joke of the Fringe" award.

For the translated version, because there is no official translation available,

translate the jokes into Bahasa Indonesia or not.

Through this undergraduate thesis, the researcher aims to understand the

strategies applied by translators to overcome the language and cultural barrier in

translating jokes from one language to another. This research is expected to be

able to help the reader, especially students of Universitas Sanata Dharma,

joke translation and humor translation in general.

two problems are:

2017” into Indonesian?

Indonesian translation of “Dave’s Funniest Jokes of the Fringe 2017”?

C. Objectives of the study

In accordance to the problem above, there are two objectives of this

based on Baker’s Taxonomy of Translation Strategies. The second objective is to

A Joke is a short piece of humorous story in which the humor culminates

Translation Strategies in this study refer to strategies that the translator

used to overcome any problems in transferring messages from SL to TL.

translation by more neutral/less expressive word, translation by cultural

substitution, translation by loan word, translation by paraphrase using related

word, translation by paraphrase using unrelated word, translation by omission,

and translation by illustration (p.26-42).