MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166454069 · doi:10.7202/037197ar

Transferring Culture in Translations —  Modern and Postmodern Options

2007· article· en· W2166454069 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Klaus Peter Müller

Bibliographic record

VenueTTR traduction terminologie rédaction · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcknowledgementPostmodernismMeaning (existential)EpistemologyValue (mathematics)Sign (mathematics)SociologyPhilosophyLinguisticsComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transferring Culture in Translations - Modern and Postmodern Options — The characteristic elements of the modern theories of translation by Charles Baudelaire and Sigmund Freud are outlined and described in the context of the question of how differences in culture and understanding can be recognized and translated. Translations depend on a certain homogeneity (between the different sign systems used) which can be provided by the creation of meaning through language. The understanding, acknowledgement and creation of meaning is vital for translations. Both Baudelaire and Freud are quite aware of the relative value of such meaning. In postmodernist theories, translation becomes 'necessarily impossible.' Paul de Man's and Jacques Derrida's practical use of Walter Benjamin's text on translation indeed shows that they do not translate him. They do, however, adapt him to their own view and their specific meaning. More and different meanings can be detected in Benjamin, though, and the necessity for multiple, ambiguous, but not entirely arbitrary translations must be recognized. Only a meaningful, inventive combination of one's own and the other's positions can make cultural transfer and the acknowledgement and tentative understanding of otherness possible.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTTR traduction terminologie rédactionSame topicTranslation Studies and PracticesFrench-language works237,207