MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972240724 · doi:10.7202/009033ar

The Translating of Screenplays in the Mainland of China

2004· article· en· W1972240724 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chunbai Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueMeta Journal des traducteurs · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainland ChinaChinaLiteral translationSpace (punctuation)PoliticsLiteral (mathematical logic)Subject (documents)LinguisticsLimit (mathematics)Translation (biology)HistoryComputer scienceSociologyMedia studiesAdvertisingLiteratureLawPolitical scienceArtificial intelligenceArtMathematicsSource textBusinessPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay discusses the translating of screenplays for dubbing in the mainland of China. It is shown that, besides the basic requirements of immediate comprehensibility and lip synchronization, the dubbing of foreign films and TV series into Chinese is subject to a number of linguistic, cultural and political constraints, which in turn put a limit on the “exotic” space in the dubbed films and TV series. A number of relevant translation strategies are then discussed, including literal translation, reduction of the original image to sense, and deletion. It is emphasized that since the basic principle of screen translation should be one of equivalent effect, the translator should endeavor to reduce the processing effort of the audience. Furthermore, it is pointed out that this “exotic” space has been increasing along with the narrowing of the cultural gap between China and the West.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

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 studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations7
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeta Journal des traducteursSame topicTranslation Studies and PracticesFrench-language works237,207