MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1924135280 · doi:10.29173/af9430

Marie-Claire Blais en traduction ou la Weltliteratur en action

2010· article· fr· W1924135280 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Rainier Grutman

Bibliographic record

VenueALTERNATIVE FRANCOPHONE · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Loin de se laisser réduire à une bibliothèque de chefs-d’œuvre, la notion de « littérature mondiale » (Weltliteratur) lancée par Goethe en 1827 renvoie plutôt à un commerce d’idées non dépourvu de concurrence. Cette dimension agonistique a été mise en relief par Pascale Casanova dans son livre La République mondiale des lettres. Elle conçoit cette dernière comme un espace où les écrivains de différentes nationalités entrent en lice et en concurrence, grâce notamment à la traduction, qui apparaît dès lors « comme l’une des voies principales de consécration des auteurs et des textes ». Où situer la francophonie dans cette constellation ? Quel en est le poids relatif, aussi bien comme fournisseur de textes-source que comme relais de textes-cible ? Si Casanova s’est penchée sur le deuxième aspect, cet article porte sur la première partie de la question. L’exemple qui servira de pierre de touche est Une saison dans la vie d’Emmanuel de Marie-Claire Blais, roman dont on connaît mal la trajectoire en traduction. Comme nous essayerons de le montrer, celle-ci passe moins par la consécration parisienne que par le relais américain, notamment grâce aux multiples interventions du grand critique Edmund Wilson, responsable de sa « traduction-consécration » new-yorkaise.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.015
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.004

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueALTERNATIVE FRANCOPHONESame topicTranslation Studies and PracticesFrench-language works237,207