MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2470738166 · doi:10.3968/7761

Chinese Translation of Children's Literature: The Late Qing Dynasty (1898-1911)

2015· article· en· W2470738166 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tingting Zhu, Jing Li, Changbao Li

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in literature and language · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinese literatureHistoryLiteratureChildren's literatureChinaArtArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Late Qing Dynasty (1898-1911) witnessed a great number of translated works of children’s literature from around the world. The present paper, under the guidance of polysysytem theory, attempts to give a synchronic study of the children’s literature translation in the Late Qing Dynasty by focusing on the network of relationship between FCLT and such systems as the canonized literature and the children’s literature in the Late Qing Dynasty. The authors of the paper hold that the change of social attitude towards children in the Late Qing Dynasty gave rise to the demand for the children’s literature and the Chinese children’s literature began to take shape, thus directly bringing about the translation of foreign children’s literature; that FCLT and the canonized literature in the Late Qing Dynasty bear a mutual influence on each other ; and that FCLT had promoted the advent of children’s literature composed by domestic scholars who modeled on the translations of foreign children’s literature. In this way, FCLT in the Late Qing Dynasty not only met the need of children’s literature in the society, but also enlightened the readers of the translations.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.677

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in literature and languageSame topicFolklore, Mythology, and Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207