Bibliographic record
Abstract
The notion of hybridity in light of the French concept of métissage opens a third way between the reefs of totality (fusion, homogeneity) and differentialism (fragmentation, heterogeneity). In an hybrid composition, the components are still visible and it is the tension between them, not the resolution, which gives its full value and its character to the alloying. In that approach, hybridity loses its negativity and becomes an ontological category which should be not dependent on cultural and sociohistorical factors. There is no such thing as original purity (for texts or anything else) which becomes modified and yields to impurity (hybridity being one example). As long as any being is subject to time – which is the primary condition for being – its essence and existence become a succession of altered states. This paper, drawing from contemporary translation studies as well as Nietzsche and Deleuze, explores the applications of such a theorisation to translation as a model of hybrid textuality and defines a „translative text” functioning as a bridge between the socalled source and target texts which are only two sequential moments of textuality and two modes of saying.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.045 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".