Texte et paratexte dans la traduction assermentée des documents universitaires : une approche contrastive français-espagnol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
À partir de l’étude contrastive d’un corpus de documents universitaires français et leurs traductions assermentées en espagnol, l’objectif du présent travail est d’analyser, d’un point de vue fonctionnaliste, les techniques de traduction appliquées dans le processus de transfert textuel. Grâce aux concepts de méthode de traduction et de technique de traduction, l’analyse contrastive permet d’examiner non seulement les aspects textuels de la traduction assermentée, mais aussi la dimension paratextuelle de cette modalité de traduction spécialisée. Les résultats mettent en évidence la tension entre adéquation et acceptabilité que sous-tend toujours le processus de traduction et le rôle essentiel que joue la culture de départ dans la détermination de la méthode de traduction globale.
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 | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".