MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997508256 · doi:10.7202/003591ar

The Translator as 'Language Planner': Syntactic Calquing in an English-Spanish Technical Translation of Chemical Engineering

2002· article· en· W1997508256 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueMeta Journal des traducteurs · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
Topiclinguistics and terminology studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLinguisticsTerminologyPlannerDocumentationProcess (computing)Subject (documents)Natural language processingArtificial intelligenceDomain (mathematical analysis)Machine translationField (mathematics)Programming languageWorld Wide WebPhilosophyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article focuses on technical translation and the demands imposed on subject-field expert translators who must decide how they can reconcile the linguistic constraints imposed by a particular language with the communicative expectations found in a particular domain. Our main hypothesis is that experts typically resort to syntactic calquing to render phraseological units such as lexical collocations. By so doing they reinforce their role as language planners not only by introducing terminology into the TL but also by imposing SL norms within the expert community. Hence, the role of translation during the process of term documentation should be enhanced.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.199 · 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