MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343310976 · doi:10.1177/0014585816636341

Translating Sicily for the German and French stage: Modern Europe, its periphery, and the archaic in Luigi Pirandello's <i>Questa sera si recita a soggetto</i> (1929–1935)

2016· article· en· W2343310976 on OpenAlexaff
Elisa Segnini

Bibliographic record

VenueForum Italicum A Journal of Italian Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermanIdeologyRelation (database)DramaContext (archaeology)RewritingElement (criminal law)HistoryLiteratureHierarchyArtFrame (networking)HumanitiesLinguisticsPoliticsPhilosophyPolitical scienceComputer scienceLawArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the last two decades, the task of the translator for the theater has been frequently discussed and translation has been recognized as an important element in the process of play production. In light of these developments, and keeping in mind that a translation, as a “politically and ideologically charged creative process of rewriting” ( Krebs and Minier, 2009 : 66), is always shaped by constrictions that go beyond linguistic and semantic criteria, this article examines and compares the Italian, German, and French dramatic texts of Luigi Pirandello's Questa sera si recita a soggetto and their relation to first productions in Germany and France, within the time frame of 1929–1935. The aim is to investigate strategies for drama translation in the context of the late 1920s to early 1930s ideology and to examine how translators' choices affected the representations of regional and national transnational identities. The analysis sheds light on drama translation as well as on the role of the translator in the process of play productions; in addition, it questions the porous boundaries between translations and adaptations, as well as the hierarchy according to which scholars have often read the “original” in relation to subsequent versions.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForum Italicum A Journal of Italian StudiesSame topicTranslation Studies and PracticesFrench-language works237,207