Cultural Pluralism through Translation? Imagining the Italian Other in the Habsburg Monarchy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The historical relationships between the Italian peninsula and Austria are also reflected in the reception of Italian literary production in the Habsburg monarchy. This can be seen in the formation of a literary canon which always goes together with selective mechanisms. These selections decisively contribute to the formation of cultural hegemonies. This paper presents the creation of the Other through the activity of translation in the context of the reception of national Italian literature in the Habsburg Monarchy. It will analyze what was accepted on the cultural market of the Habsburg Monarchy and what the criteria for the reception of translated Italian literature were. Against the background of a short survey of the various aspects of the Italian image created through intercultural contacts, this paper investigates the ways in which these images were discussed, created and represented through translation. The analysis of some paratexts will show that the margin left for the Italian cultural Other was quite narrow and largely reduced to stereotypical views of Italian culture.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it