Apostille: Notes supplémentaires au chantier de 1997 sur Walter Benjamin.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette apostille propose un supplément à l'appareil critique greffé à la traduction en français de Die Aufgabe des Übertsetsers qu'Alexis Nouss et moi-même avions présentée en 1997. J'apporte certains correctifs à notre traduction initiale. J'ai aussi sélectionné des termes qui agissent comme des révélateurs de la trame conceptuelle qui court en filigrane de cet essai : par exemple, l'usage de l'adverbe intensiv ou encore la notion d'ingenium. Enfin, je consacre un assez ample développement à l'importance que revêt, pour bien saisir la stratégie narrative mise en place dans le prologue de Benjamin, l'usage de métaphores d'extraction kabbalistique, qui l'inscrivent de plain-pied dans la tradition mystique juive. Je m'oppose sur ce point au traitement plutôt laxiste qu'Antoine Berman a accordé à cette dimension, qu'il juge négligeable ou anecdotique, alors qu'elle constitue la clef de voûte de la métaphysique du langage élaborée par Benjamin.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.010 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".