Bibliographic record
Abstract
Movie is not only a popular form of entertainment but also an important medium in inter-cultural communication. More and more communication between Chinese and English movies goes with the globalization. As a result, movie translation has become more and more important, especially title translation. However, there are many problems in movie title translation. In the hope of improving the present situation, this paper makes a study on how to translate English and Chinese movie titles. With many title translations as examples, the paper analyzes the characteristics of movie titles and focus on the problems in Chinese and English movie title translation, and concludes that there are three main problems, the messy and low-quality situation, the argument between alienation and assimilation, and over-imitation to Hollywood blockbusters’ translation modes. This paper analyzes the examples and tries to find the reasons for each problem. Finally, suggestions are given on how to solve the problems, that translators should consider the individuality and characteristics of the original movie and consult the cultural backgrounds to keep the informatic, aesthetic and commercial functions in balance. So that readers can get a general idea about the situation of movie title translation and pay enough attention to movie title translation, and to improve the situation. Key words: movie title translation, alienation and assimilation, over-imitation Resume: Le cinema est non seulement une forme artistique preferee des gens, mais aussi un media tres important des echanges interculturels. Sous l’influence de la globalisation, les echanges internationaux de films deviennent de plus en plus frequents, la traduction des films parait alors de plus en plus importante, en particulier celle des titres des films. Mais il existe aujourd’hui beaucoup de problemes dans le domaine de la traduction des titres des films. L’auteur a fait des recherches sur la traduction. En citant de nombreux exemples, on a analyse les caracteristiques des titres des films chinois et anglais, les problemes qui existent dans la traduction dont les trois problemes principaux : celui de la confusion et de la mauvaise qualite de la traduction ; celui du debat de l’assimilation et de la dissimilation ; celui de l’imitation excessive du modele de la traduction des films hollywoodiens. On a aussi analyse selon ces exemples leurs origines. Enfin, on a donne quelques propositions pour resoudre ces problemes, c’est-a-dire, les traducteurs doivent, pour maintenir l’equilibre des fonctions informatique, esthetique et commerciale des titres traduits, trouver la meilleure traduction en tenant compte des caracteristiques individuelles des films et de la difference des circonstances culturelles chinoise et anglaise. Cet article a pour le but d’aider a mieux comprendre la situation actuelle de la traduction des titres des films, de susciter l’attention de sa traduction et d’elever la qualite de la traduction. Mots-Cles: traduction des titres des films, assimilation et dissimilation, imitation excessive, fonctions informatique, esthetique et commerciale
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".