MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1917864282 · doi:10.4000/palimpsestes.1988

La voix anglaise de Marie-Claire Blais : enjeux diachroniques de l’homogénéisation

2013· article· fr· W1917864282 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Agnès Whitfield

Bibliographic record

VenuePalimpsestes · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lauréate de nombreux prix prestigieux canadiens et internationaux, l’écrivaine québécoise Marie-Claire Blais a publié plus de quarante livres. Si sa voix porte loin en français, sa voix en anglais ne semble pas avoir de réelle présence ni avoir suscité beaucoup d’échos. Le fait que ses textes aient été traduits en anglais par une douzaine de traductrices et de traducteurs, aux antécédents personnels, professionnels et linguistiques fort variés, aurait-il nui à la réception de l’ensemble de son œuvre dans les pays anglophones, en menant à une sorte de brouillage, voire de dispersion de sa voix en anglais ? Plus précisément, dans quelle mesure les démarches traductives de l’homogénéisation auraient-elles produit des effets confusément hétérogénéisants, effets pervers qui ne pourraient devenir perceptibles que dans une perspective évolutive des traductions ? Cet article cherche à répondre à ces questions à partir d’une analyse de trois traductions qui témoignent autant de l’évolution du style de l’écrivaine que des changements dans les contextes éditoriaux et littéraires anglophones : A Season in the Life of Emmanuel, traduit par Derek Coltman (Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1966) ainsi que deux traductions signées par Sheila Fischman : A Literary Affair (McClelland and Stewart, 1979) et These Festive Nights (Anansi, 1997).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalimpsestesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207