Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article proposes to examine the stakes of translation in literary texts. Inspired by Pierre Bourdieu's theory of culture, it uses the notions of habitus, field and illusio in the framework of the translation of American literature in post-WWII France. After a short definition of what a field is for Bourdieu, we analyse the power of literary translation during the period. As it is based on the relationship between the habitus of the translator and a field, the translation is endowed with a power which is not stated as such and which relies on the exercise of legitimate violence from dominants, i.e., a violence that is not known as violence, a violence that is tacitly recognised. Thus, American literature imposes in France under the form of non-canonical genres such as Science Fiction and the Série noire, but also highbrow literature, the translation of which has begun before WWII. The article closes on the stakes of Worldwide globalisation: the imposition of literary illusio , that is, the imposition of Western hegemony, on an overall scale.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.045 | 0.079 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.116 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.035 | 0.040 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".