On the Translator’s Subjectivity -- From the Perspective of Gadamer’s Philosophical Hermeneutics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For a long period in history, translation approach is prescriptive and source-text oriented. Much of the emphasis is put on the nature, criteria and techniques of translation, highlighting the decisive status of the source text and putting the translator in a neglected position. With the uprising of the descriptive translation approach accompanying the “Cultural Turn” in translation studies in the west after the 1970s, the complex role that the translator plays in the whole process of translation has gained increasing attention among translation theorists. The subjectivity of the translator, one branch of the study on the translator, has become a necessary and important research subject. This paper applies the basic notions of Hans-Georg Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics-historical interpretation, prejudice and fusion of horizons-to justify the translator’s subjective creativity in the act of translation. It probes into the connotation of the translator’s subjectivity, its manifestations and restrictions. Key words: Translator’s subjectivity; Philosophical hermeneutics; Interpretation; Fusion of horizons
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".