MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

DOUBLE BIND E ESCRITA: a poética da tradução em textos da literatura do Quebec

2013· article· pt· W1886801958 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Renato de Sousa

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Italiano UERJ · 2013
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resumo: Nosso trabalho pretende refletir sobre a noção de double bind (DERRIDA, 2002) a partir de textos da literatura do Quebec que ora tematizam ora problematizam a questão da tradução. Trata-se de uma produção marcada pelo que Sherry Simon denomina como um “processo ‘inacabado’ de tradução” (SIMON, 1994), na qual se faz referência a uma diversidade de códigos linguísticos e culturais. Nossa leitura vai privilegiar textos do escritor de origem brasileira Sergio Kokis (1996) e da autora e roteirista Monique Proulx (2005). Palavras-chave: Tradução. Double bind . Literatura canadense de língua francesa. Escrita migrante. Identidade. Abstract: Il nostro studio pretende di riflettere sulla nozione di double bind (DERRIDA, 2002), partendo da testi letteratri di Quebec che ora tematizzano ora problematizzano la questione della traduzione. Si tratta di una produzione segnata da quello che Sherry Simon chiama un “processo ‘incompiuto’ di traduzione” (SIMON, 1994), nella quale si fa riferimento a una diversità di codici linguistici e culturali. La nostra lettura priviligerà testi dello scrittore di origine brasiliana Sergio Kokis (1996) e dell’autore e sceneggiatore Monique Proulx (2005). Key words: Traduzione. Double bind . Letteratura canadese in lingua francese. Scrittura migrante. Identità.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.385

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0170.022
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Italiano UERJSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207