MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2510479146 · doi:10.5539/ass.v12n9p84

Ideologically-adapted Translations: Challenge for Adequacy, Need for Retranslation

2016· article· en· W2510479146 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aida Salamat Suleymanova

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyCensorshipTarget cultureTranslation studiesHistoryPeriod (music)Literary translationWorld literatureSociologyLiteratureAestheticsPolitical scienceLinguisticsLawArtPhilosophyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Translation has always been regarded as the main channel for disseminating works of art, literature and culture. Throughout the history, Azerbaijani writers and poets have contributed to the world literature, as well as benefitted from the best literary masterpieces of the world by means of translation. The art of translation is the credit to the interaction between nations, cultures, and literatures in particular. However, the path of historical development of the national translation studies and translation practice in Azerbaijan has not always been smooth. Azerbaijan has for 70 years been a part of the USSR, and consequently all fields of human life, as well as translation activity were under strict control of the central authority. Ideological censorship imposed on culture, art and literature, particularly, on the literary translation can still be sensed today. The aim of this paper is to study the ideological deviations, adaptations and modifications in fiction translation during the Soviet period in Azerbaijan and to show why retranslation of such works is necessary in our country.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.185
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.361
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1850.361
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.036
Scholarly communication0.0120.019
Open science0.0040.012
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicTranslation Studies and PracticesFrench-language works237,207