"Good Sisters" and "Darling Sisters": Translating and Transplanting the Joual in Micheal Tremblay's Les Belles-Soeurs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parce que le recours à un dialecte non standard est jugé essentiel à la pièce de Michel Tremblay Les belles-soeurs, on s’attendrait à ce que les traducteurs relèvent le défi suivant : comment recréer l’effet du joual de Tremblay dans un contexte social et linguistique différent. Toutefois, l’étude de trois versions de la pièce (anglaise, écossaise et allemande) à la lumière du concept que Lawrence Venuti appelle «domestic remainder» (l’inscription idéologique du public cible dans le travail de traduction) montre que dans ces versions, et plus particulièrement dans la version allemande, d’autres aspects culturels de la pièce de Tremblay aient semblé plus importants à traduire que les éléments strictement linguistiques. Ces traductions mettent l’accent sur l’importance historique et culturelle des Belles-soeurs et sa contribution à l’élaboration d’un canon littéraire, au détriment d’une recherche d’équivalence au joual dans la langue d’arrivée.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".