Realization of Cultural Filter in The Indonesian – English Translation o f “Gundala Movie” Subtitle

___________________________________________________________________ Translating a movie subtitle from Indonesian into English should be done carefully because Indonesian and English have some differences which may lead to ineffective communication, such as the changing of structures, the difference of meanings, and also dissimilarity of corresponding cultures. This phenomenon might be a concern since many Indonesian movies have entered international audiences and won some international awards, such as the Gundala movie that is directed by Joko Anwar. This study focused on analyzing the cultural filter implemented in Indonesian – English audio-visual translation of Gundala movie subtitles. The analysis utilizes the cultural filter theory proposed by House (2015). T he data analysis focused in this study includes the characters’ utterances in Indonesian and its English subtitle provided in the Gundala movie. The subject is the Indonesian transcription from verbal dialogues produced by the movie characters in Gundala movie and its English subtitles shown on the screen. The object of the study is words, phrases, and sentences produced by the characters in the Gundala movie. Most translations applied cultural filter achieves functional equivalence. Theoretically, the cultural filter can help the translator to achieve functional equivalence. Practically, for the next translation project,


INTRODUCTION
A moviemaker needs a translator. It is to transfer what is spoken by the character within the movie in the form of Audio-visual translation (Luyken, 1991;van Dijk, 1998;Venuti, 2017;Wati, 2017;Xinya, 2016;Xuanyi, 2017). He proposed two types of audio-visual translations, dubbing and subtitling, to facilitate the audience enjoying the movie in their language. Although these two terminologies share some similarities, they have major differences. Dries (1995) and Tempel et al (2012) argued dubbing dealt with transferring the character's dialogue from one language into another by recording the message within the utterances and synchronizing them with the characters' lip movements. On the other hand, Gambier and Gottlieb (2001) and Triwiyanti et al (2017) explained it as translating character's dialogues within the movie by providing it in different language printed below the movie.
Subtitling a movie is correlated to the language and culture within the movie. Hastuti (2015) and Uher (2016) argue subtitling a movie has to be done prior by having texts which also depends on the contexts of situation and contexts of cultures within the texts. According to Rahmawati and Setiawan (2019), Zhang (2018), Zhang & Wang (2010), and Zequan (2003), subtitling a movie is identified as an interlinguistic subtitle that involves two languages.
Each culture possesses different partialities, attitude, values, social and norms that make a translator utilizes a cultural filter to achieve functional equivalence and to remove the gaps of two languages (House, 2015). The cultural filter enables the translator to capture the socio-cultural differences between the two languages. House (1997) argues that the framework of the cultural filter is deemed as an instrument for encapsulating the socio-cultural dissimilarities in expected norms and stylistic agreements between the original and targeted linguistic-cultural societies. This is in line with Hartono (2014), Tacazely et al (2019), Yuliastri (2017), Yuliastri & Allen (2019), and Yuliastri & Hartono (2014) stated that translation products should be socio-culturally acceptable for the target language. Therefore, cultural filter plays a crucial role in subtitling a movie. House (2015) also introduced two types of translations, namely overt and covert translation in which only covert translation requires cultural filter because the translation tends to be source language-oriented to achieve translation equivalence. Regarding the analysis of translation, overt and covert translations are emerged in determining the textual functions of the text and its translation. Hatim and Mason (1990) and Utami (2017) define translation as an act of communication to relay, across cultural and linguistic boundaries, another act of communication. Thus, a translator should create a textually equal text in the target language to the source text based on the purpose and the audience of the translated text. Furthermore, Engliana (2015) and Tharaha (2015) argue that text transfer takes place in the word level as well as at pragmatic level.
According to Mujiyanto (2016), by using the viewpoint of discourse competence, a translator could also understand the social and cultural context of the relevant communities where the language is used. In this study, the analysis must focus on both the linguistic elements as well as the cultural context of both languages. Therefore, translation is not identified merely as transferring language or interlingual process, but it also includes the intercultural communication between source language culture and target language culture.
As the central issue of translation, equivalence between the source text and target text becomes the priority that should be sought after. Although some equivalence can be approached but the option always depends on the purpose of translating the text, one of them is a functional equivalence. Equivalence has always become the basic standpoint to be achieved by the translator. People generally accept equivalence as the reproduction of an SL text in a TL text.
Translating a movie subtitle from Indonesian into English should be done carefully because Indonesian and English have some differences, such as the changing of structures, the difference of meanings, and also dissimilarity of corresponding cultures. Katan (1999), Tan (2015), Tan (2017), and Utamayasa et al (2017) describe a cultural filter as a means of encapsulating cognitive and socio-cultural differences which are utilized by translators to mediate the culture in the process of translation. House (2015) has designed cross-cultural dimensions in implementing the cultural filter in texts, consciously or unconsciously, in medicating cultural differences based on the respective norms between two languages. There are five cross-cultural dimensions within the cultural filter which could be seen as follows: This research aims to find out the realization of cultural filter indicated in the Indonesian -English translation of Gundala movie subtitle and the functional equivalence of the Indonesian -English translation of Gundala movie subtitle. Besides that, Indonesian people tend to speak in a way of considering themselves as the subject that acts upon the verbs rather than the recipient, the concept of the active and passive voice will also be included as a par of the cross-cultural dimension analysis. Moreover, the translation is also viewed from the perspective of functional equivalence to see whether the equivalence has been achieved by the translator. Besides, the analysis will lead to a conclusion on whether the translation product belongs to overt or covert translation.

METHOD
This study focused on analyzing the cultural filter implemented in Indonesian -English audio-visual translation of Gundala movie subtitles. The analysis utilizes the cultural filter theory proposed by House (2015) which deals with five cross-cultural dimensions in filtering the culture and theory of functional equivalence and covert and overt translation (Nida, 1982 andHouse 2015) concerning the Indonesian -English audio-visual translation of Gundala movie subtitle.
The data analysis focused in this study includes the characters' utterances in Indonesian and its English subtitle provided in the Gundala movie. The subject is the Indonesian transcription from verbal dialogues produced by the movie characters in Gundala movie and its English subtitles shown on the screen. All spoken utterances produced within the film from Indonesian is transformed into written English translation. The object of the study is words, phrases, and sentences produced by the characters in the Gundala movie.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In this research, the obtained data had been analyzed based on the theories of the dimension of cultural filter proposed by House (2015). The cultural filters include five dimensions; they are directness, orientation towards self versus orientation towards others, orientation towards content versus orientation towards addressee, explicitness versus implicitness, and ad-hoc formulation versus verbal routines. Moreover, the writer added one dimension of active voice versus passive voice that existed in many dialogues. The finding of cultural filters in Gundala movie subtitle can be seen in the table below:  House (2014), the cultural filter led to the achievement of functional equivalence. The analysis of the functional equivalence can be seen in the following table. Most dialogues with cultural filters could reach functional equivalence. However, twentyfour utterances do not achieve functional equivalence. Non-equivalence translation occurs in the dimensions of orientation toward the selfversus orientation to others, the orientation towards content against the orientation towards addressee, the explicitness versus the implicitness, the ad-hoc formulation versus the verbal routines, and the active voice versus the passive voice. The numbers of non-equivalence can be seen in the following table . Ad-hoc formulation versus verbal routines 5 5 Active voice versus passive voice 4 Total 24 From the table, the orientation towards content versus the orientation towards the addressee has the highest rate. Moreover, the achievement of functional equivalence and its relation to the cultural filter is also elaborated. The analysis of functional equivalence applied the theory of equivalence proposed by Nida (1964) and House (2015). Functional equivalence is achieved if the translation has the same function and represents the context of the situation of the original version.

Cultural Filter in terms of Directness
All transformation achieves functional equivalence. The researcher did not find nonequivalence in this case. It shows the source text tends to use a direct strategy while target text often uses an indirect strategy. This occurs because Indonesian people do not refer to themselves when they try to present their opinion. They often speak directly while English native speakers usually emphasize that opinion.
One opinion might be different from another. This culture also affects the translator. He prefers the directness to indirectness. Moreover, ST tends to use the uncertain expression with hedging "katanya" of the character while TT does not use hedging. ST tends to employ indirectness while TT employs directness. The TT clearly shows the confidence of TT audiences. Otherwise, ST audiences are depicted as hesitant and safe-oriented by avoiding responsibility for what they say.
It was also found that ST tends to use honorific to address older. In this case, the honorific term is considered as a polite way to call respected people based on the distance, higher social level, well occupation, and older ages. In Indonesian, it is not acceptable to use "you" to address people who have those requirements. In English, people directly call others "you" without necessarily considering the honorific term.
These findings strengthen House's statement (2014) in which cultural filter nonobjectively and consequently undertake changes on the situational dimensions. According to Geertz (1973), Indonesian tends to hide their emotions and try not to show others. So, they are better to deliver their idea indirectly.

Cultural Filter in Terms of Orientation Towards Self Versus Orientation Towards Other
Based on the data, there were 4 transformations from orientation towards self to orientation towards other. Meanwhile, the transformation from orientation towards others to the orientation towards self does too. These findings are similar to House's (2015) about cultural filter dimensions between English and Germany. She stated that Germans found to give preference to the orientation towards self. This transformation is marked by the use of the pronoun. The transformation mostly occurs when the pronoun in the original version refers to 'I' which belongs to an orientation towards self. The translator chooses to use 'they/them' which refers to the speakers rather than 'i'. This is caused to make the context clearer and easier for the readers of TT.
Another finding shows that ST tends to expose the outsider involvement as the consideration in giving influence to the context of the text based on the cultural aspect in its language environment. Indonesian tends to put family and community concerns over business and individuals. Thus, their communication style would likely focus on the addressee.

Cultural Filter in Terms of Orientation Towards Content Versus Orientation Towards Addressee
This cultural filter occurs 110 times in the translation. There are two kinds of transformation; those are transformation from orientation towards addressees to the orientation towards content, and orientation towards addressees to the orientation towards content. The first transformation, from orientation towards addressees to the orientation towards content, occurred 15 times. Meanwhile, the transformation from orientation towards content to the orientation towards addressees occurred 95 times. It can be inferred that there is a huge margin between those two kinds of transformations. This phenomenon explains that ST does not show the executors explicitly while TT does. TT employs orientation toward the addressee while ST employs orientation toward content.
The pronoun which is mostly changed into orientation towards content is 'you'. It occurred 28 times. The translator chooses to add pronouns to define the actor or interlocutor although the context is already clear enough. This transformation mostly does not change the meaning of a translation. If the context is ambiguous, the translator chooses to mention the name of a person or thing. The subject in a sentence can be omitted when the subject is definite and the context is clear. TT tends to use imperative forms to invite the readers involving in the story such as "lets". ST tends to use the declarative form to tell the story. By finding this result, it could be seen that Indonesian (ST) has the dimension of orientation toward content, and English (TT) has the dimension of orientation toward the addressee. Furthermore, TT tried to show an expressive manner by using the imperative expression.

Cultural Filter in Terms of Explicitness Versus Implicitness
Based on the analysis of the cultural filter in the terms of explicitness versus implicitness presented in the previous section, this dimension occurs 17 times. Similar to the analysis of the other dimensions, there are two kinds of transformation. They are transformation from explicitness to implicitness and transformation from implicitness to explicitness. The first transformation, which is from explicitness to implicitness occurs 6 times. Meanwhile, the other transformation also appeared 11 times. Thus, TT tends to use explicitness by adding some information while ST tends to use explicitness since the audience understands the context and situation without any addition.
There is a technique mostly used by the translator, it is an addition. The translator often adds some information to make the context clearer. It is used when the utterances are ambiguous and will create some confusion to the audience of the English language. In this case, the translator uses a cultural filter when the expressions in the movie are unfamiliar to the audience of TT. The translator often takes effort into the translation to be understood easily by the audience of TT. As a result, the transformation of implicitness to explicitness is used. Moreover, most of the translation from implicitness to explicitness achieves functional equivalence.

Cultural Filter in Terms of Ad-Hoc Formulation Versus Verbal Routines
This finding occurred 22 times. There are two transformations; those are transformation from ad-hoc formulation to verbal routines and transformation from verbal routines to ad-hoc formulation. The transformation from verbal routines to ad-hoc formulation occurs the most. Based on the data, 17 translations achieve functional equivalence, while 5 translations are non-equivalence. The translator does not use many verbal routines in English to translate the text.
Based on the analysis, there are some reasons why the translator does not use many verbal routines in translating Indonesian movies. First, the translator has poor knowledge of verbal routines used by native speakers in both languages, which are Indonesian and English. The second reason is that the expression of ST does not meet with the expression of TT and there is no expression similar to English that can describe the situation in Indonesian precisely. Thus, the translator chooses to use ad-hoc formulation to translate the Indonesian utterance.
Besides, ST tends to use an uncertain expression of the character while TT uses a fixed expression. ST employs verbal routine while TT employs ad-hoc formulation. It can be seen that ST tends to show the uncertainty of the character instead of exposing the confidence. TT tends to be more expressive compared to ST.

Cultural Filter in Terms of Voice
There are two transformations; those are transformation from active voice to passive voice and transformation from passive voice to active voice. However, in this translation, the transformation from passive voice to active voice occurs the most with 33 occurrences. Thus, ST tends to use passive voice while TT tends to use passive voice.
From the analysis of the dimensions of active voice versus passive voice, it can be seen that the target language preferred using active voice rather than passive voice. The translator chooses to focus on the subject. It is intended so that the readers will understand the context easily and can get a better view of someone or something which is in the case.
Moreover, the translator uses an active voice because he wants to show the executors and makes the context clear enough. Indonesian usually uses object focus. It means that passive voice is used often. This statement is strengthened by an article by British Council which stated that passive voice is used frequently in Bahasa Indonesia. The analysis showed that the transformation from active voice to passive voice occurred frequently rather than the transformation from passive voice to active voice.

Functional Equivalence
The theory of functional equivalence is based on the theory of equivalence proposed by Nida (1964) and House (2016). There are two requirements to achieve functional equivalence. First is that the source text and its translation have the same function. Second, the functional equivalence will be achieved if the translation creates a similar context of the situation as the source text.
Under the analysis of functional equivalence, the researcher found 212 translations that achieve functional equivalence. Meanwhile, 24 utterances do not meet functional equivalence. There are some causes of non-equivalence; such as the inappropriateness in using pronouns and the translator's misunderstanding of the context. In this research, non-equivalence occurs in the transformation of orientation towards self to the orientation towards other, orientation towards content to the orientation towards addressees, explicitness versus implicitness, verbal routines to the ad-hoc formulation, and active voice to passive voice.
The data shows that non-equivalence in the term orientation towards others occurs because the translator uses inappropriate pronouns. This problem happens because the translator has little understanding of the context. Another non-equivalence translation is also found in the transformation of explicitness to implicitness. It is caused because the translator wants to make clearer the context although there are some translations are not equal with the source text. Moreover, non-equivalence in the term of voice is presented in translating the clause "Saya tidak akan pernah takut.." to be "they scare me" in the English version. The original version uses a passive form to convey the speaker's message while the translated version uses an active form. In the original version, feri is not scared of the people who are paid by pengkor. Meanwhile, the translator conveys that the people that are paid by pengkor scare ferry.
Even though there are some nonequivalence translations, there are more translations that achieve functional equivalence.
Out of 236 cultural filters, 212 translations achieve functional equivalence. Thus, the translation of the Gundala Movie achieves functional equivalence.

CONCLUSION
From the findings and discussions of this study, the researcher found 236 utterances that contained six dimensions of the cultural filter in the Indonesian-English translation Gundala Movie. Those dimensions were in the terms of directness occurs 44 times, in the term of orientation towards self versus orientation towards other occurs 8 times, in the term of Orientation towards content versus orientation towards addressee 110 happens times, Explicitness versus implicitness occurs 17 times, Ad-hoc formulation versus verbal routines 22 times, and in the term of voice occurs 35 times.
For the directness, the Source Language tends to use directness form while Target Language tends to use indirect form. Moreover, the researcher found that all the data in the term of directness meet the equivalence translation since the target text can create a similar context as in the source language.
The second dimension had two kinds of transformations: from orientation towards self to the orientation towards other (4 occurrences) and transformation from orientation towards other to the transformation towards self (4 times). In the term of functional equivalence, there are 3 utterances do not achieve equivalence translation while 5 utterances achieve equivalence.
The next is the cultural filter in terms of orientation towards content versus orientation towards addressees. There are two transformations, which are the transformation from orientation towards content to the orientation towards addressee and vice versa. The analysis shows that the translator prefers to use the term of toward content to the addressee. It is proven by the occurrences of the transformation from orientation towards content to the addressee is higher than the transformation from orientation towards addressee to content.
For explicitness versus implicitness, there were the transformation from explicitness to implicitness (6 occurrences) and the transformation from implicitness to explicitness (11 occurrences). The analysis shows that the translated version tends to use explicitness rather than implicitness to make clearer the context and audience of TT also understand the movie. In this case, four utterances do not meet the equivalence of translation.
The fifth dimension of the cultural filter shows that the translator often chooses ad-hoc formulation in translating Indonesian-English subtitles of Gundala Movie. Five utterances do not achieve functional equivalence as propose by Nida (1964) The last dimension is about voice. There are two transformations: transformation from active voice to passive voice (2 times) and the transformation from passive voice to active voice (33 occurrences). It shows that the target language mostly uses active voice to make the audience of TT understand the context easily. Moreover, four utterances contain nonequivalence translation.
Based on the data, most of the translation with the use of cultural filter achieves functional equivalence. It is proven by the amount of functional equivalence achieve in the Indonesian-English translation. Statistically, 212 utterances achieve equivalence translation while there are only 22 utterances that contain nonequivalence. Nevertheless, most of the utterances which used cultural filter achieve functional equivalence.
Theoretically, the cultural filter can help the translator to achieve functional equivalence.
Practically, for the next translation project, it could be a good challenge for the next researcher to explore the translation studies using this theory. It is suggested to explore more complex texts to find out richer findings in cultural filter implications through texts.
Pedagogically, the reader should be more familiar with the cultural differences between Indonesian and English toimprove their language skill, especially in the daily life of Indonesian people and the audience of the target language.