<i> Histoire des traductions en langue française, <scp>xx</scp> <sup>e</sup> siècle: 1914–2000 </i> . Sous la direction de <scp>Bernard Banoun</scp> , <scp>Isabelle Poulin</scp> et <scp>Yves Chevrel</scp> <i> Histoire des traductions en langue française, <scp>xx</scp> <sup>e</sup> siècle: 1914–2000 </i> . Sous la direction de BanounBernard, PoulinIsabelle et ChevrelYves. Paris: Verdier, 2019. 1920 pp., ill.
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
This is the fourth volume of the Histoire des traductions en langue française (HTLF). The first, covering the nineteenth century, was published in 2012; further volumes covering the fifteenth to eighteenth centuries followed in 2014 and 2016. Altogether the project represents an astounding labour of scholarship and international collaboration, completed over a relatively short time period. The HTLF sets itself the ambitious goal of observing the role played by translations in all areas of intellectual enquiry. Around 40 per cent of the volume under review is devoted to literary translation, and a further 40 per cent is shared between other areas, such as opera, cinema, religion, philosophy, history, anthropology, and the sciences. The remainder of the volume is taken up with contextualizing essays by leading translation theorists, and includes a history of traductologie, a field of research which — like translation studies in the UK — has come into its own since the 1970s. These rough percentages give an indication of the balance and scope of the volume, and the range of readers for whom it will no doubt become a vital resource. Far from being an enumeration of translated publications, the HTLF is a series of carefully constructed historical narratives, based on a critical approach to primary sources, and alert to the silences and biases within those narratives. In the chapter on the sciences, for example, the authors sketch out broad trajectories of translation activity against the backdrop of changing trends in language use in scientific publications, but note that any account that is based on written documents and bibliographic research overlooks the significance of what they term ‘invisible’ translation activity. By this they mean translations which circulate in unpublished form, or as annexes to original works, or, towards the end of the century, via simultaneous interpretation at major international conferences. Throughout the volume, there is a concern to shine a light on translators, ‘trop longtemps invisible’ (p. 7). Thus one of the contextualizing chapters is devoted to the translation profession and translator education; there is an index of translators as well as an index of authors; feature boxes offer biographical accounts of individual translators such as Vladimir Nabokov (pp. 815–16); names of translators are systematically included in the historical accounts, and are supplemented on occasion with further details about their other publications or activities. Considerable attention is also given to the crucial role played by patrons and editors in determining translation selection. Geographically, the focus of the volume is on the major francophone spaces of the West — France, Canada, Belgium, Switzerland. Temporally, the volume ends, as its title indicates, in the year 2000; only one of the chapters (on feminism and gender studies) extends in-depth discussion into the early decades of the twenty-first century. From the perspective of today’s technology-imbued world, there is already a sense on reading this ‘final’ HTLF volume (p. 7) that a history of the first decades of the twenty-first century needs to follow not long behind.
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 | 0,003 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,014 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
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