Sexual Pun: A Case Study of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet JEU DE MOTS SEXUEL: UNE ETUDE DE CAS DE ROMEO ET JULIETTE DE SHAKESPEARE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In general, puns are of great artistic value which imbue and enrich a literary work with secondary and tertiary meanings. Because of the double or triple-tiered meanings involved, this stylistic device is not easily amenable to translation; however, the problems can still pile up where one of the given meanings of a pun refers to the genitals and with sexuality coming to the fore. The present study aims to analyze the translations of Shakespearean sexual puns in one of his famous plays, viz. Romeo and Juliet. In fact, sexual puns bear serious repercussions for many translating languages which have to be handled with care. Empirical analysis is based on the English source text and five translations, two French ones rendered by Hugo and Jouve, one Italian version by Raponi and two Persians by Naziri and Pazargadi. Having analyzed the ST and TT pairs as regards sexual pun, it was observed, interestingly enough, that in almost all the cases in the three mentioned languages, the sexuality aspect of the punnistic words had been deleted, euphemized and normalized; hence, culminating in loss of punning activity. Key words : Romeo and Juliet; Sexual pun; Pun; Strategies; Translation Resume En general, les jeux de mots sont de grande valeur artistique qui impregner et d'enrichir une oeuvre litteraire avec des significations secondaires et tertiaires. En raison des significations des doubles ou des triples niveaux impliques, cette figure de style n’est pas facile de les faire la traduction, mais les problemes peuvent encore s’amonceler dans l’une des significations donnees d’un jeu de mot se refere aux organes genitaux et a la sexualite a venir au premier plan. La presente etude vise a analyser les traductions de Shakespeare calembours sexuels dans une de ses celebres pieces de theâtre, a savoir. Romeo et Juliette. En fait, les jeux de mots sexuels porter de graves repercussions pour de nombreux langages traduction qui doivent etre manipules avec soin. L’analyse empirique est basee sur le texte source anglais et cinq traductions, deux en francais fournis par Hugo et Jouve, une version italienne par Raponi et deux Persans par Naziri et Pazargadi. Apres avoir analyse les paires ST et TT en ce qui concerne calembour sexuelle, il a ete observe, assez curieusement, que dans presque tous les cas dans les trois langues mentionnees, l’aspect sexualite des mots punnistic avait ete supprime, euphemisee et normalisee; donc, aboutissant a perte d’activite calembour. Mots cles : Romeo et Juliette; Jeu de mots sexuel; Calembour; Les strategies; La traduction
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".