MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2299734794

Hamlet the Sign: Russian Translations of Hamlet and Literary Canon Formation

2010· article· en· W2299734794 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Patrick Finn

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Slavonic Papers · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHAMLET (protein complex)Sign (mathematics)LiteratureRhetorical questionInterpretation (philosophy)HistoryArtPhilosophyLinguistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aleksei Semenenko. Hamlet the Sign: Russian Translations of Hamlet and Literary Canon Formation. Stockholm Studies in Russian Literature, vol. 39. Stockholm: University of Stockholm Press, 2007. 198 pp. Cinema stills. Bibliography. Appendices. Index. SEK 293, paper.In this monograph Aleksei Semenenko sets out a methodical examination of the dynamic relationship that exists between the play Hamlet and its multiple manifestations in Russia. It would be hard to overestimate the influence that Russian publication, performance and critical reflection has provided to the world of Hamlet studies, though Semenenko provides a cool-headed interpretation of the propinquitous relationship across time and several theoretical models. The book makes a serious contribution to scholarship in an area that is still insufficiently unexplored - a fact that makes this work all the more compelling given the excess of literature published on other aspects of Shakespeare's famous play.The book is a doctoral dissertation published after the fashion of the European Academy where such works are not fundamentally redrafted as more popular book forms. The format suits this project particularly well. Its detail and inclusion of references - not to mention the crisp architecture of presentation - combine to make the book eminently usable.Chapter one focuses on the theory and method the author will use to make his examination. The approach claims to be based in semiotics and maintains that commitment throughout. The method is defined in terms of its use within the rhetorical structure of the book and is cognizant of its potential blind spots. At times the author seems a touch defensive about the perception of semiotics as an anachronistic form of theoretical practice, but such arguments are quickly left behind. The strengths of the choice of a semiological model become clear when the author attacks the seemingly disparate areas of literature, canonicity, translation and interpretation in a fashion that allows us a practical entry into an English-language study of the Russian life of Hamlet.Chapter two examines the canonicity of the play in the Russian context. Much has been written about the position of Hamlet at the centre of the English literary canon as well as the transposition ofthat position into the romance languages. Significant work has also been performed on the Japanese history of the play, but in very few of those cases does the author present such an intelligent framework for the interplay of a fictional world alive in another language and 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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Slavonic PapersSame topicTranslation Studies and PracticesFrench-language works237,207