De l’Union européenne à la Bretagne : la traduction dans les politiques linguistiques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Que la Bretagne se soit dotée d’une politique linguistique pourra en surprendre plus d’un. La France n’est-elle pas monolingue ? Quelles langues s’agit-il de traduire dans ce cadre ? Et surtout, pour quoi faire ? Que peut bien apporter l’analyse de la situation bretonne à la compréhension de la politique linguistique de l’Union européenne, l’organisation qui dispose à ce jour des plus grands services de traduction au monde ? Cette comparaison permet pourtant de mieux percevoir le rôle social et la valeur de la traduction professionnelle, non seulement sur le plan économique, mais aussi, et surtout, sur le plan de la communication. Car elle favorise un certain rapport à la langue, et donc à soi-même, dans l’échange et la négociation. La traduction professionnelle prend alors une place prépondérante, voire devient la politique linguistique, et c’est sa quasi-absence dans les écrits sur les politiques linguistiques qui a de quoi interpeller.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".