Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
1. INTRODUCTIONIntralingual translation, as we know it, or as the discipline of Translation Studies (TS) mainly employs, was coined by R. Jakobson in the context of linguistic aspects of translation as rewording, i.e. interpretation of verbal signs by means of other signs of the same (1959: 114) and distinguished itself from translation or translation proper which an interpretation of verbal signs by means of some other and translation or transmutation, that an interpretation of verbal signs by means of signs of nonverbal sign systems (ibidem). The topic has been little researched so far, despite the fact that it should have been, as Baker underlines in her preface to the Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies: translation is not such a minor issue as the existing literature on translation might suggest... I know of no that looks specifically at the phenomena of intralingual or intersemiotic translation. We do have classifications such as Jakobson's, which alert us to the possibility of such things as intersemiotic and intralingual translation, but we do not make any genuine use of such classifications in our research (Baker 1998: xvii). Recent studies on the subject go as far as identifying norms and translation universals in intralingual translation (cf. Anlaug Ersland's MA thesis, defended in 2014 at The University of Bergen, Norway), displaced nationalism in the case of the American intralingual translation of Harry Potter (cf. Alexander Eastwood's from The University of Toronto 2010 study), or describe it through translation analyses (cf. Karen Korning Zethsen's 2009 analysis of five different Danish versions of a section of the Bible in Meta).2. INTRALINGUAL TRANSLATION BELORE 1989Reflections on interlingual translation are many and date as back as the 16th century, when the first (religious) translations were carried out and the translators also reflected on their importance; thus, Coresi, in his preface to intrebare cre§tineasca/The Christian Inquiry (1559), the first translation into Romanian, argued that this task was necessary since people need to understand who Romanians are as Christians, as Saint Paul the apostle speaks... This is because five words in Romanian that can be understood by the people are better than ten thousand words in a foreign language that cannot (quoted by Lungu Badea, 2005: 145). However, intralingual translation was significantly less dealt with. To our account, it was probably first mentioned in the communist period by loan Kohn's study, Virtutile compensatorii ale limbii romane m traducere/ Compensatory Virtues of Romanian in Translation (1983) in the context of the (hermeneutical) importance of translation in all cultures since the beginning of times. The Romanian TS scholar brings into play Jakobson's study mentioned above and the distinction between the three types of translation, namely 'interlingual', 'intersemiotic' and 'intralingual' to support his allegations; the last of the three, i.e. intralingual translation, is considered to be translation in its current sense, hence the most recent one. At its beginnings, this form, that actually occurred late, incorporated the other two to a greater extent than nowadays. The aporia in the translation of The Septuagint is, for Saint Jerome, not so much a result of the incongruence between Greek and Latin, but particularly between the divine and human idiom which will make him utter Sciens et prudens in flamman mitto manum (Kohn, 1983: 23-24). If translation has the meaning of understanding in a given context, the message can thus be decoded and included in the sphere of what is known, be it intralingual or interlingual communication; this is because any act of understanding is, at the same time, deciphering and interpretation, and hermeneutical considers expression in a different language to be only more difficult on the scale of hermeneutical interpretation. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle