MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2994067825 · doi:10.25205/1818-7935-2019-17-4-130-137

Current Trends in the Russian Translation Theory: Towards a New Methodological Standard of Translation / Book Review: Mishkurov, E. N. Hermeneutics of Translation (Towards Theoretical and Methodological Standard of Translation): Monograph. Moscow, Military University Press, 2018, 298 p. (in Russ.)

2019· article· en· W2994067825 sur OpenAlex

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.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueVestnik NSU Series Linguistics and Intercultural Communication · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueDiscourse Analysis and Cultural Communication
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésTranslation studiesLinguisticsSociologyConsistency (knowledge bases)Focus (optics)EpistemologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In the second decade of the 21st century Russian translation studies are receiving a fresh impetus. Amid attempts the culture-oriented translatology undertakes to disown principles of the linguistic approach that traces its origin to R. Jakobson’s works, Russian scholars are first and foremost keen on ensuring consistency with methodology of the Soviet and French Canadian school (J.-P. Vinay, J. Darbelnet, G. Mounin, Y. I. Retsker, A. V. Fedorov, E. G. Etkind, etc.) while revisiting existing approaches to translation and recognizing a huge impact the culture has on it. In our opinion, their goal is to develop some universally applicable paradigm, a sort of “framework” theory, that can explain an interaction of all old and new factors in an act of intercultural mediation by means of translation without casting doubt upon translation as such given it has been proving itself as a practice for many centuries. The focus of recent theoretical research is gradually shifted from linguistic reasoning per se towards an in-depth analysis of counterproductive ideas and factors of linguistic and literature studies approaches in the development of the Russian translatology (R. R. Chaykovskiy), discourse aspect of translation within the framework of a communication situation that allows of taking into account all formants of the latter, including the goal and strategy of translation as well as tactics of its implementation (V. V. Sdobnikov), analysis of the transition discourse in a self-organizing translation space forming the translator’s harmonious outlook aimed at harmonizing meanings of interacting languages and cultures (L. V. Kushnina), in-depth analysis of audiovisual translation peculiarities within the process-oriented translation approach that indisputably requires conveying an image-sense of the film dialogue (V. E. Gorshkova), representation of translation as a discourse and communication model facilitating creation of a discourse dossier as a basis for a translation strategy development as exemplified by an institutional discourse (T. A. Volkova), consideration of ways the verbal and cogitative process and translator’s understanding take their course in the mono- and cross-cultural communication (P. P. Dashinimaeva), development of a systemological transdisciplinary model of translation (N. K. Garbovskiy). All these studies implicitly or explicitly touch upon the hermeneutic aspect of translation, a deep philosophical rationale of which has been given in a monograph by E. N. Mishkurov who interprets it as “a hermeneutical turn” and undertakes a critical analysis of fundamental works by F. Schleiermacher, H.-G. Gadamer, W. Benjamin, G. Steiner, P. Ricoeur and other western philosophers as well those by Russian scholars. He postulates that, within a proposed hermeneutic paradigm of translation (HPT), a hermeneutic-translation methodological standard (HTMS) is created as a transdisciplinary interlingual “mental generative” model of translation mediation under the principle of “hermeneutic circle / hermeneutic spiral”. An “algorithm” of the model described as a standard one presupposes that there must be four stages in it: pre-understanding, understanding, interpretation and translator’s decision. The latter is regarded as a stage where phenomenological reduction of interpretation of meanings taking place at the three previous stages is completed. Thus, translations activity is a development and one of the forms of philosophical and hermeneutical treatment of discourse phenomena that considers interpretation as its main tool. E. N. Mishkurov believes that the use of the above mentioned standard allows us to take into account all classic and innovative translation models providing for a “discourse equivalent and pragmatically adequate” version when dealing with different types of texts, their genres, and particularly when translating contexts that cannot be re-expressed by means of regular translation correspondences. The author’s ideas are backed up by examples in Russian, English, French and Arabic.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,589
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,674

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,104
Tête enseignante GPT0,382
Écart entre enseignants0,277 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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