{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027854918791550956, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006311537490532693, 'mean_word_length': 5.05091649694501, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Impact of Transposition on Grammatical Metaphor a Study of Translation From the Perspective of SFL Theory

There are five major translation procedures generally adopted for translation practice: transposition, modulation, adaptation, equivalence with context, and equivalence with a note (Machali, 2009:92). Transposition or shift (Catford, 1965), however, is one of the translation procedures unavoidable to attain the equivalence between the source language (SL) and the target language (TL). It is a procedure of changing grammatical forms from SL to TL. This paper is aimed to explore the impact of applying transposition viewed from Systemic Functional Language (SFL)Theory (Halliday, 1994) by which language is considered as designed: (i) to understand the environment or build experience, and (ii) to act on the others. Here the clause plays a central role where the reality is made up of processes: material, mental, and relational. Based on the notion of metaphor as the variation in the expression of meanings, metaphorical variation is lexicogrammatical rather than simply lexical (Halliday, 1994:341). This analysis shows that adoption of transposition has potential to change such processes. Consequently, a metaphorical clause may change into a congruent (non-metaphorical) one due to such a translation procedure. The examples of clauses with grammatical metaphors used in this study are taken from The Book of Psalm (Kitab Mazmur): English version is considered as SL and Indonesian version as TL. The result of the analysis is that: (i) all procedures have potential (not always) to change a metaphorical clause in SL into congruent one in TL, (ii) transposition has a great potential to change metaphorical clauses into congruent ones. Based on the result of this study, it may be concluded that SFL theory can be adopted as a theoretical ground for translation study, and so as a tool of analysis in the praxis of translation. Transposition, from the view of SFL, not only the shift of structure but also the change of grammatical process.


Introduction
In the practice of translation, the application of the transposition procedure is inevitably used by translators to achieve equivalence between the meaning of the source language (SL) and the target language (TL) due to the structural differences in language patterns. Transposition is the process of replacing the structure of the SL text with a different structure of the TL, yet retains meaning (Wilss, 1980). According to Machali (2009) there are four kinds of transposition or shifting forms, namely (i) a shift in the form of compulsory caused the system and rules of language so the translator does not have any choice; (ii) a shift is adopted because the grammatical structure of the SL does not exist in the TL, (iii) a shift for reasons of fairness or flexibility in the TL, and (iv) a shift to fill lexical gap in the TL.
Since the transposition target is a clause by changing its grammatical structure, while from the perspective of systemic functional theory the meaning process actually occurs within clauses, so it is necessary to assess whether the application of the transposition procedures has an impact on the grammatical process. This paper would like to convey the impact of the application of the transposition based on the analysis of clauses containing grammatical metaphors. The data are taken from The Book of Psalm as the SL (English), and Kitab Mazmur as the TL (Bahasa Indonesia).

Research Method
This research is descriptive qualitative with the phenomenological approach by which the data are considered as emerged phenomena. Theory of Systemic Functional Language is used to be a tool of analysis. The steps of research are as follows:

Data Collection
Target Language data are taken from Indonesian texts Kitab Mazmur, and Source Language data are taken from English text The Book of Psalm. By reading and examining thoroughly these two texts, some clauses containing grammatical metaphors are noted. Examination of such clauses is done to identify the adoption of transposition procedure on them.

Technique of Analysis
Based on metafunction of language (SFL theory), the analysis is conducted to know the process of meaning formation taken place in a clause. The core process takes place in prediction: material, mental, and relational process. By comparing TL and SL texts, the analysis is done to identify the change of meaning process due to the adoption of transposition as translation procedure.

Model of Research
The

Results and Analysis 3.1 Meta Function of Language
As the theoretical ground of this study, it is necessary to see an outline of ideas in the Systemic Functional Language theory (SFL) introduced by Halliday (1980) in which language is comprehended in relation to its function for human life. Halliday argues that the language has three metafunctions, namely ideational, interpersonal, and textual functions. Tavernier (2004) explains these three metafunctions of language as follows: a) Ideational meta function is relating to the language as representation, whose role is to shape reality. This function is fulfilled by breaking reality into the processes that take place with the participating entities. The participants can be a living creature, abstract or concrete objects. b) Interpersonal meta function is relating to language as interaction, namely the role of language that allows interpersonal relationships. This process is also called relational. One of the grammatical components in this process is the use of interpersonal modality to express evaluation of something that will happen in reality, for example about certainty, possibility, and so forth. This modality is expressed with the use of modal such as may, must, maybe, surely, certainly, and so forth. Another component is the interpersonal mood revealed through the interrogative and imperative forms. The choice of the respective type of mood indicates the position. For example, by choosing interrogative mood indicates the position of the party as one requesting information. c) Textual Meta functions relating to the organization of textual discourse. The third function is not used in this study because only ideational and interpersonal meta functions occur in clauses relating to grammatical metaphor.
From the perspective of the theory of SFL, the term "process" is concerning with ideational metafunction, namely the processes of representing and shaping reality. The process is normally expressed through the clause called congruent, but it could be differently expressed through a noun phrase. Here is an example of changing a clause into a noun phrase, John's writing a letter to his sister surprised me. From the perspective of SFL, a process consisting of a verb (write), and participants (John, letter, and his sister) must be congruently constructed in a clause, John wrote a letter to his sister. Thus, the noun phrase of John's writing a letter to his sister surprised me is metaphorical because of the shift process of clause into a noun phrase. As already mentioned, interpersonal metafunction is expressed through the use of modality and mood. The congruent form of this function is signalled by the use of modal such as you may go home or he will certainly arrive here, while the metaphorical forms may be as in I think John has already left; It is very likely that John has already left; Everyone believed that John had already left; It is clear that John has already left.
In connection with the mood, Halliday distinguishes three types of interactive functions normally or congruent: (i) expressions (declarative form) is a phrase to provide information, (ii) the question (interrogative form) to request information, and (iii) commands (imperatives) to ask for something to happen. Correspondence between function and form are called congruent, whereas shift between function and form is called metaphorical. For example, congruent command expressed through imperative, send your proposal by email, please! This command can be expressed metaphorically as could you send your proposal by email, please? (function for imperative but the form in interrogative) or I would advise you to send it by email. (function for imperative but the form of declarative) .

Grammatical Metaphor
Halliday & Martin (1993: 79) state that grammatical metaphor is the substitution of one grammatical class or structure by other grammatical class or structure. For example, the process of departing (verb) is converted into a noun in he is departing into his departure. Thompson (1996: 165) states that grammatical metaphor is an expression of meaning through the lexicogrammatical form by which the original meaning can be expressed differently. Thus, the grammatical metaphor is a way in which the same meaning can be expressed metaphorically as well as congruent with the grammatical process. Since metaphor is variation in the expression of meanings, so metaphorical variation is lexicogrammatical rather than simply lexical (Halliday, 1994:341).
Halliday distinguishes two main types of grammatical metaphors in the clause based on metafunction of language: ideational metaphor (transitivity) and interpersonal metaphor (mood and modality). As ideational function, a clause contains participants (actor, goal), process (material, mental, relational), and circumstance Comparing the clauses above, the mental process of saw in (a) is replaced by a material process of came upon in (b) and turned into the participant or goal of sight. In such way, the same meaning can be expressed in a different form by changing the process.

Transposition and Grammatical Metaphor
The following clauses are taken from The Book of Psalm as the SL and Kitab Mazmur as TL in which the transposition procedure is applied in the translation process.

1) Psalm 31: 25: Let your heart take courage
The clause is metaphorical for as Actor, your heart is not a conscious being that can take action (material process), as well as courage is an abstract thing. Transposition is applied by changing verb hast made into be ialah, and replacing Goal of Lord as Actor. Verb make is the process of doing (material process), while ialah is the process of being (relational process), so in such a way transposition can change the grammatical process.

3) Psalm 23: 2 He maketh me to lie down in a green pasture
Maketh here is not the same as in he is making a kite, but it has a semantic component of "cause" called causative verb (Halliday 1994: 350), so the grammatical process is not material but relational. Transposition applied by replacing maketh with membaringkan (to lie down) changes the grammatical process from relational into the material. From SFL view, some changes occur e.g. Initiator  Actor, Actor  Goal, and Relational material. The metaphorical clause in the SL, then, changes into congruent one in the TL.

Conclusion
A translation product is the result of the translation process in which the translator has chosen and made some decisions, starting from the ideological partiality oriented to the TL or the SL, until the applied specific procedures. The main purpose of those policies is to attain the meaning equivalence between the SL and the TL. Transposition, by the structural view, is a shift of grammatical form without changing the meaning e.g. word to phrase, noun to verb, etc. From the SFL view, however, transposition can be understood as the changing of the grammatical process such as material to relational, and the form of a clause from metaphorical to congruent. This finding could be used by the translator in making the decision to choose the right procedures and their impacts, particularly the transposition. Moreover, the study of translation from the perspective of SFL theory can enrich both the theoretical and practical domains of translation.