MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ON LU XUN’S UN-FLUENT TRANSLATION

2009· article· en· W1857367188 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xia Tian

Bibliographic record

VenueCross-cultural communication · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluencyHumanitiesPhilosophyArtLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluency as an acknowledged translation criterion has been in a dominant position in China for a long time. Translators have been striving for this fluency; readers and critics have been evaluating translated versions according to this criterion. But in translation history, even at the palm time of fluent translation, exceptions can still be found. Un-fluency as a translating strategy was frequently used and highly advocated by some important translators like LU Xun. The author of this paper has expected to explore the main reasons for LU Xun’s un-fluent translating strategy; find the specific translating methods applied in producing his un-fluent versions; and analyze the influence and significance of his un-fluent translation both on literary tradition and translation theory and practice. This paper attempts to make a descriptive study of un-fluent translation as a history phenomenon by taking LU Xun’s translation as a typical example. Key words: Deviation; Resistancy; LU Xun; Un-fluent Translation Resume: La fluidite en tant qu’un critere de traduction reconnu est dans une position dominante en Chine depuis une longue periode. Les traducteurs s’ efforcent d’atteindre cette fluidite; les lecteurs et les critiques evaluent la qualite des oeuvres traduites selon ce critere. Pourtant dans l'histoire de la traduction, meme a l'epoque d’or de la traduction fluide, il y a toujours des exceptions a trouver. L’un-fluidite a ete frequemment utilisee et hautement preconisee par certains traducteurs importants comme LU Xun comme une strategie de traduction. L'auteur de cet article tente d'explorer les raisons principales de cette strategie de LU Xun couramment traduction; de trouver les methodes specifiques appliquees dans sa traduction un-fluide, et d’analyser l'influence et l'importance de sa traduction laborieuse a la fois sur la tradition de traduction litteraire et sur la theorie de la traduction et de la pratique. Ce document tente de faire une etude descriptive sur la traduction un-fluide comme un phenomene historique en prenant la traduction de LU Xun comme un exemple typique. Mots-cles: deviation; resistance; LU Xun; traduction un-fluide

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.016
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCross-cultural communicationSame topicTranslation Studies and PracticesFrench-language works237,207