Dialogue, Reassurance and Understanding: Framing Political Translations during the 1980 and 1995 Quebec Sovereignty Referendums
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada during the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, more than one thousand works – and about one hundred translations – were published on the topics of Quebec nationalism, independence movements, and sovereignty referendums, in both of Canada’s official languages. Despite the diversity of these publications, which included biographies, political analyses, and polemical essays, almost all the works touched on themes that have generated controversy in Canada. The paratexts in these translations are therefore an important resource that highlight perceived differences between the political opinions of Francophone and Anglophone readers. This article will analyze the paratexts in the English and French translations to show how the target language audience was encouraged to read a translation of a work that was very clearly not addressed to them, and which in some cases even criticized the very audience it now addressed. Finally, it will examine which features these English and French paratexts do and do not share, while trying to determine why these similarities and differences exist.
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 | 0.016 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.041 | 0.041 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".