MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151175567 · doi:10.7202/037225ar

Keeping One’s Distance: Translation and the Play of Possibility

2007· article· en· W2151175567 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michael Cronin

Bibliographic record

VenueTTR traduction terminologie rédaction · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranslation (biology)CreativityMetaphorTranslation studiesDynamic and formal equivalenceAction (physics)CognitionRelation (database)LinguisticsComputer scienceEpistemologySociologyCognitive sciencePsychologyPhilosophySocial psychologyMachine translation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Keeping one's distance: Translation and the play of possibility – This article proposes a ludic theorisation of translation examining the implications of the concept of play for translation theory and translation pedagogy. The equation of play with a simulative mode of action points to the centrality of mechanisms of identification and projection in the translation interpreting classroom. The shift from the pre-operational to the operational level of logic and the metacommunicative and metalinguistic dimensions to play and translation demonstrate the cognitive importance of the latter, in intellectual development and the elaboration of identity. Play, metaphor and translation are linked through the concept of bisociative thinking which grounds the essential creativity of translation and its capacity for discovery. The paradoxical nature of translation and play are considered both in relation to the cognitive possibilities of translation and its contribution to aesthetic renewal. The use of a tripartite division of ludic text types in translator education and the potential of limits are further evidence for the significance of the ludic dimension to translation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTTR traduction terminologie rédactionSame topicLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionFrench-language works237,207