MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992722558 · doi:10.7202/016475ar

Traduction négative et traduction littérale : les traducteurs de Poe en 1857

2007· article· fr· W1992722558 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Benoit Léger

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes françaises · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le vaste corpus des traductions publiées en 1857 comprend des versions distinctes des mêmes contes d’Edgar Allan Poe, traduits par William Hughes et par Baudelaire. Ces versions s’opposent, le poète des Fleurs du mal choisissant une combinaison de littéralisme et d’accentuation du caractère morbide de l’oeuvre de son confrère américain, tandis que Hughes, pétri de culture française et spécialiste de la littérature pour la jeunesse, choisit la rationalisation du texte, l’étoffement et la paraphrase, pour transformer les Tales en lieux communs du conte. Baudelaire, en étroite communion avec l’oeuvre de Poe, procède, quant à lui, par identité d’esprit et cherche à produire une traduction-texte. À la traduction « positive » de Hughes, s’oppose ainsi chez le poète français une pratique de la « traduction négative » (entendue au sens photographique du terme) qui cherche à révéler la nature profonde du texte.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes françaisesSame topicHistorical and Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207