MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158165330 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v3n5p29

The Translation Strategy of Advertisement based on Nonequivalence between Chinese and English Conceptual Metaphors

2013· article· en· W2158165330 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hongjun Chen, Ruoyi Qiu, Yu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Education of the People's Republic of China
KeywordsMetaphorConceptual metaphorEmbodied cognitionPreferenceTranslation (biology)PsychologyLinguisticsCognitionAdvertisingComputer scienceFunction (biology)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsBusinessPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article performed a qualitative and quantitative comparative study on metaphor translation between Chinese and English advertisements under the guidance of the Conceptual Metaphor Theory. Through an analysis of 100 pieces of well-known English advertisements and their official Chinese translation, the study found that the reflections of nonequivalence between Chinese and English metaphor embodied in the difference or missing of target domain in metaphoric mapping on one hand and the preference of conceptual metaphor types on the other. The purpose of reducing the information loses during the metaphorical conversion can be obtained by properly handling the mapping including adjustment, additions and omissions, and then adjusts the metaphor types according to the culture orientation and cognitive system of the target language. Such strategies can help better highlight the advertising purpose while maintain the poetic function of advertising at the same time.

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)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.287 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionFrench-language works237,207